Hello everybody,
I have put up the tasks for the interschool Abhinav Stars on the net. Please go to the concerned web pages or lookup the Stimulus Home page. Deadline for returning the solutions either hand-writ (to our office by post of in person) or by email to admin@abhinav.ac.in is 9th Dec, by 4 pm
Dec 5, 2009
Nov 20, 2009
Chitra's response to Philosophy of Science Assignment
A-
By definition in sociology, a community is an organized group of people holding same values. This explains why a ‘scientific community’ requires a set of beliefs to exist. This set of beliefs is actually the postulates. But the problem is that they are received- which clearly refers to tacit knowledge and not inductive reasoning. The process of formation of a scientific community comes in with a pre-exiting set of beliefs that are true to the ongoing ideas of science. Thus is the term ‘trade’ used to signify give and take within that sphere.
The first offshoot of the assumption is agreeable as the time factor comes in. The student class of a community will be ‘in education’ when professionals are practicing their trade. As long as they belong to the students class- 1. They have to abide by their job of studying science i.e. what the current set of laws sees to be right. 2.They have to remain a student i.e. the completion of having all knowledge about the set of beliefs makes them professional and unacceptance towards community’s laws outcasts them. A student is under an impression that he s learning science and not a version of it. Absence of any counterevidence to the set of beliefs will further aggravate it. In the end the student’s mind will follow the given rationality and that will be the license for scientific practice.
The second point is about the nature of education. The rigor and rigidity actually comes from the limitations of a set of beliefs and limits imposed upon the physical and mental experimentation a student applies in the learning process.
This set of beliefs form a paradigm. Kuhn gives the concept of paradigm in science which ca be explained as- 1. Outcome of a set of postulates give science a famous notion. 2. In Kuhn’s words paradigm comes from a great work. 3. This gives a sense of sufficiency and completeness which is not necessarily true but remains unquestioned in the reign of the paradigm.
B-
Normal science is a science that follows a norm of routine work in experimentation within a paradigm. This is more than normative as the need of a norm in science puts an end to questioning of the postulates which is the basis for that science. Restriction on introduction of thought that might violate this norm is the reason why the community gives the world a false impression that they know what the world is like. They actually explain world they way they see it, which in itself is not enough to know the truth about how the world actually is.
Scientists being temperamental about their assumption being true in all cases of science and more than that sufficiently occupying all the areas of science, is a result of absence of counterevidence [which obscurely continues from their studenthood] or wanton discarding of that counterevidence.
C-
Here comes the point when the scientific community chooses to overlook facts which shake the foundation of normal science. Once such a blasphemous evidence which falsifies the postulates of normal science is accepted, that will be the end of that science. Thus it is suppressed; but after the suppression the science part of the concept of ‘normal science’ is at threat.
D-
Research- as the word suggests is a repeated search. Nothing wrong with repetition of the act of searching but following a prescribed search route devaluates its productivity. In science the sense of what is implied by this word should be an organized, extensive and objective process executed by an open mind. Kuhn has described the clash of the etymological basis and entailed meaning of the word research. It is strenuous as it demanding because of the licensing system in a normal science and also tiring in the other implication of the same word. This tiring factor and devoted efforts are closely related. No matter what outcome does a scientist’s mind provides, oppression of the undesirable factors is a requirement to remain a scientist. Thus forcing nature i.e. explaining how the world works and creating versions of truth is the solution to it. That is where the ‘conceptual boxes’ come into the picture. They are rigid definitions of concepts which do have limitations at their ends but a large capacity to fit in the modified inferences. This is highly professional for a scientist in normal science as this is what his education system taught him; it makes him the saviour for the norm.
E-
Here we consider cases where normal science dies away- because of the high potency of the counterevidence or an external pressure on the scientific community which demeans its norms. These are scientific revolutions as Kuhn describes them. They liberate the shackled ‘fundamental novelties’. In the earlier assumption Kuhn uses the word fundamental as the largely observed facts and go against the older principles.
Thus the need for a new set of beliefs comes in. The newly taken evidence modifies or replaces the postulates that make a paradigm. The resistance continues until new science strengthens itself to explain truth, explains the older problems or cases in science as well and reaches far and wide to call for acceptance.
The shift described is a step of rationality. It puts an end to subjectivity and makes science a concept that can be derived from reality all over. The qualitative transformation refers to the experimentation by open-minded scientific practitioners that has lesser limitations. This is not completely different from the quantitative enrichment as science has to be that way. All the theories sanctioned by science should be scientific in the right sense and all that comes to be evidence naturally cannot be ignored by science.
By definition in sociology, a community is an organized group of people holding same values. This explains why a ‘scientific community’ requires a set of beliefs to exist. This set of beliefs is actually the postulates. But the problem is that they are received- which clearly refers to tacit knowledge and not inductive reasoning. The process of formation of a scientific community comes in with a pre-exiting set of beliefs that are true to the ongoing ideas of science. Thus is the term ‘trade’ used to signify give and take within that sphere.
The first offshoot of the assumption is agreeable as the time factor comes in. The student class of a community will be ‘in education’ when professionals are practicing their trade. As long as they belong to the students class- 1. They have to abide by their job of studying science i.e. what the current set of laws sees to be right. 2.They have to remain a student i.e. the completion of having all knowledge about the set of beliefs makes them professional and unacceptance towards community’s laws outcasts them. A student is under an impression that he s learning science and not a version of it. Absence of any counterevidence to the set of beliefs will further aggravate it. In the end the student’s mind will follow the given rationality and that will be the license for scientific practice.
The second point is about the nature of education. The rigor and rigidity actually comes from the limitations of a set of beliefs and limits imposed upon the physical and mental experimentation a student applies in the learning process.
This set of beliefs form a paradigm. Kuhn gives the concept of paradigm in science which ca be explained as- 1. Outcome of a set of postulates give science a famous notion. 2. In Kuhn’s words paradigm comes from a great work. 3. This gives a sense of sufficiency and completeness which is not necessarily true but remains unquestioned in the reign of the paradigm.
B-
Normal science is a science that follows a norm of routine work in experimentation within a paradigm. This is more than normative as the need of a norm in science puts an end to questioning of the postulates which is the basis for that science. Restriction on introduction of thought that might violate this norm is the reason why the community gives the world a false impression that they know what the world is like. They actually explain world they way they see it, which in itself is not enough to know the truth about how the world actually is.
Scientists being temperamental about their assumption being true in all cases of science and more than that sufficiently occupying all the areas of science, is a result of absence of counterevidence [which obscurely continues from their studenthood] or wanton discarding of that counterevidence.
C-
Here comes the point when the scientific community chooses to overlook facts which shake the foundation of normal science. Once such a blasphemous evidence which falsifies the postulates of normal science is accepted, that will be the end of that science. Thus it is suppressed; but after the suppression the science part of the concept of ‘normal science’ is at threat.
D-
Research- as the word suggests is a repeated search. Nothing wrong with repetition of the act of searching but following a prescribed search route devaluates its productivity. In science the sense of what is implied by this word should be an organized, extensive and objective process executed by an open mind. Kuhn has described the clash of the etymological basis and entailed meaning of the word research. It is strenuous as it demanding because of the licensing system in a normal science and also tiring in the other implication of the same word. This tiring factor and devoted efforts are closely related. No matter what outcome does a scientist’s mind provides, oppression of the undesirable factors is a requirement to remain a scientist. Thus forcing nature i.e. explaining how the world works and creating versions of truth is the solution to it. That is where the ‘conceptual boxes’ come into the picture. They are rigid definitions of concepts which do have limitations at their ends but a large capacity to fit in the modified inferences. This is highly professional for a scientist in normal science as this is what his education system taught him; it makes him the saviour for the norm.
E-
Here we consider cases where normal science dies away- because of the high potency of the counterevidence or an external pressure on the scientific community which demeans its norms. These are scientific revolutions as Kuhn describes them. They liberate the shackled ‘fundamental novelties’. In the earlier assumption Kuhn uses the word fundamental as the largely observed facts and go against the older principles.
Thus the need for a new set of beliefs comes in. The newly taken evidence modifies or replaces the postulates that make a paradigm. The resistance continues until new science strengthens itself to explain truth, explains the older problems or cases in science as well and reaches far and wide to call for acceptance.
The shift described is a step of rationality. It puts an end to subjectivity and makes science a concept that can be derived from reality all over. The qualitative transformation refers to the experimentation by open-minded scientific practitioners that has lesser limitations. This is not completely different from the quantitative enrichment as science has to be that way. All the theories sanctioned by science should be scientific in the right sense and all that comes to be evidence naturally cannot be ignored by science.
Saarang's response to the Philosophy of Science Asisgnment
In 1962, Thomas Kuhn wrote a book called, “The Structure Of Scientific Revolutions” where he made an analysis of science and its history. In this essay, the statements made by Kuhn will be analyzed one by one, and then judged, based on its underlying logic and examples/situations put forth. Let us see them.
A. A scientific community cannot practice its trade without some set of received beliefs
1. These beliefs form the foundation of the "educational initiation that prepares and licenses the student for professional practice"
2. The nature of the "rigorous and rigid" preparation helps ensure that the received beliefs exert a "deep hold" on the student's mind.
What Kuhn says is that any scientific community must have a collection of certain well-established or well-accepted theories or assumptions before it actually acts. The initiations of any education are based on these assumptions or beliefs. These initiations involve teaching the students these assumptions and theories and determine their qualities of the students based on the ability of the student to apply them or perceive them. The rigorous training given in this initiation is for these theories to have a deep hold on the students which would help them in achieving the mentioned results.
If X is student of a school or college then, everything taught to X in school or college is based on the theories and assumptions established by the researchers. Every test or exam X gives is for X to always follow this thought out way of thinking. Every work X is given is for the theories and assumptions to be deeply influenced by X.
B. Research is "a strenuous and devoted attempt to force nature into the conceptual boxes supplied by professional education"
According to Kuhn, research involves an attempt to study and to classify the laws of any phenomenon in nature, into the various conceptual fields made by society. E.g. =science, commerce, psychology, etc. The researchers literally re-search the concepts behind any phenomenon in nature, and classify them into professional fields of education so as to simplify and specify the knowledge to be learned.
When we try to analyze the various fields or branches of knowledge we know, we would find that any research in any field is done on phenomenon based on the field’s fundamental concepts. However, the concepts themselves are interconnected. For example, research on plants and animals is classified in biology. Biology itself is also classified into various conceptual boxes such as paleontology, zoology, biotechnology, etc. Chemistry is also classified into such boxes such as organic chemistry, inorganic chemistry, economic chemistry, etc. All these fields are based on some fundamental laws, classified into the field of Physics. Moreover the formulae and calculation methods which are used to study physics are based on physics. This classification of phenomenon is research.
C. A shift in professional commitments to shared assumptions takes place when an anomaly "subverts the existing tradition of scientific practice". These shifts are what Kuhn describes as scientific revolutions—"the tradition-shattering complements to the tradition-bound activity of normal science".
1. New assumptions (paradigms/theories) require the reconstruction of prior assumptions and the reevaluation of prior facts. This is difficult and time consuming. It is also strongly resisted by the established community.
2. When a shift takes place, "a scientist's world is qualitatively transformed [and] quantitatively enriched by fundamental novelties of either fact or theory"
Kuhn says that the shift in professional commitments to shared assumptions takes place when a better method of perseverance, is formed which shatters the traditional previously established, methods of science practice. It is when there is a shift in the community’s set of assumption or more precisely, the community’s way of thinking. This shift is what, according to Kuhn a scientific revolution. To bring about this change the assumptions or the theories have to be rethought or reevaluated and be put to the test. Naturally, it is nearly impossible to frequently improve a concept nor is it easy to create/recreate/reevaluate a completely different and better assumption or theory. A scientific community would avoid this, as it completely pointless in always trying to contradict our own set of what Kuhn beliefs.
But when this shift does takes place, a scientists discovers a new, improved way of thinking as well as acquires some new information or facts. A rough example I can give is the change that took place after the 1900s when Einstein put his theories based on a newer methodology there was a change in the way of thinking instead of the previous way of thinking which prevailed during the period of Newton.
Finally, we judge these statements as right or wrong. After considering all the statement, in my opinion, Kuhn’s statements are rational, logical, connected and precise about its analysis, thus true
A. A scientific community cannot practice its trade without some set of received beliefs
1. These beliefs form the foundation of the "educational initiation that prepares and licenses the student for professional practice"
2. The nature of the "rigorous and rigid" preparation helps ensure that the received beliefs exert a "deep hold" on the student's mind.
What Kuhn says is that any scientific community must have a collection of certain well-established or well-accepted theories or assumptions before it actually acts. The initiations of any education are based on these assumptions or beliefs. These initiations involve teaching the students these assumptions and theories and determine their qualities of the students based on the ability of the student to apply them or perceive them. The rigorous training given in this initiation is for these theories to have a deep hold on the students which would help them in achieving the mentioned results.
If X is student of a school or college then, everything taught to X in school or college is based on the theories and assumptions established by the researchers. Every test or exam X gives is for X to always follow this thought out way of thinking. Every work X is given is for the theories and assumptions to be deeply influenced by X.
B. Research is "a strenuous and devoted attempt to force nature into the conceptual boxes supplied by professional education"
According to Kuhn, research involves an attempt to study and to classify the laws of any phenomenon in nature, into the various conceptual fields made by society. E.g. =science, commerce, psychology, etc. The researchers literally re-search the concepts behind any phenomenon in nature, and classify them into professional fields of education so as to simplify and specify the knowledge to be learned.
When we try to analyze the various fields or branches of knowledge we know, we would find that any research in any field is done on phenomenon based on the field’s fundamental concepts. However, the concepts themselves are interconnected. For example, research on plants and animals is classified in biology. Biology itself is also classified into various conceptual boxes such as paleontology, zoology, biotechnology, etc. Chemistry is also classified into such boxes such as organic chemistry, inorganic chemistry, economic chemistry, etc. All these fields are based on some fundamental laws, classified into the field of Physics. Moreover the formulae and calculation methods which are used to study physics are based on physics. This classification of phenomenon is research.
C. A shift in professional commitments to shared assumptions takes place when an anomaly "subverts the existing tradition of scientific practice". These shifts are what Kuhn describes as scientific revolutions—"the tradition-shattering complements to the tradition-bound activity of normal science".
1. New assumptions (paradigms/theories) require the reconstruction of prior assumptions and the reevaluation of prior facts. This is difficult and time consuming. It is also strongly resisted by the established community.
2. When a shift takes place, "a scientist's world is qualitatively transformed [and] quantitatively enriched by fundamental novelties of either fact or theory"
Kuhn says that the shift in professional commitments to shared assumptions takes place when a better method of perseverance, is formed which shatters the traditional previously established, methods of science practice. It is when there is a shift in the community’s set of assumption or more precisely, the community’s way of thinking. This shift is what, according to Kuhn a scientific revolution. To bring about this change the assumptions or the theories have to be rethought or reevaluated and be put to the test. Naturally, it is nearly impossible to frequently improve a concept nor is it easy to create/recreate/reevaluate a completely different and better assumption or theory. A scientific community would avoid this, as it completely pointless in always trying to contradict our own set of what Kuhn beliefs.
But when this shift does takes place, a scientists discovers a new, improved way of thinking as well as acquires some new information or facts. A rough example I can give is the change that took place after the 1900s when Einstein put his theories based on a newer methodology there was a change in the way of thinking instead of the previous way of thinking which prevailed during the period of Newton.
Finally, we judge these statements as right or wrong. After considering all the statement, in my opinion, Kuhn’s statements are rational, logical, connected and precise about its analysis, thus true
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)