Understanding Science: From Descartes and Galileo to Kuhn and Gadamer
Exponga modes of demarcation of science that have the logical positivists, Popper and Kuhn; A
Demarcation: is dnde we limit lo qe es lo qe .= science not science is falsifiable. (True and false) seudoposicional in nature, is not susceptible to observation, but is subject to these limits, is false.
Popper
Change the way we see the social sciences, uses principle of induction: no way to know if the theories are true, then they are hypotheses. (Qeda verification criterion obsolete)
The social sciences have be spoofed x qe experience. If not subject to falsification, not science.
Kuhn
The social sciences and represent a paradigm qe qe is a scientific community can do normal science under the base of the paradigm. It raises questions to the scientific character of the social sciences.
B 5–
Delineation of the social sciences. It is where we draw the line on what and what is not science.
Proposition has to do with true / false. Pseudoposicional character, is not susceptible to observation
Popper: Changing the way we see the social sciences because it uses the principle of induction. Then there is no way to know if the theories are true then always hypothesis.
The social sciences according to this field of demarcation is meaningless, since there is no sense of corroboration.
The social sciences have to be falsified by experience. One theory that does not get in the corroboration is not rocket science.
Any theory must assume a position of being distorted.
This demarcation criterion is related to that is falsifiable.
In Kunth: social sciences represent a paradigm for social science in a scientific community can do under normal Cienciala based paradigm.
There may be scientists but no science. (Must have design paradigm for the social sciences).
Explain q Heidegger means the expression, the proposition, derivative mode of interpretation;
This has to do with being in the world, which is to go beyond the concept of subject, is the possibility that this subject is removed the world and achieve autonomy.
The subject can not be removed from the world and only according to Heidegger, being in the world, is to understand the world and open it.
This opening of the world has two components: one is factual (born in a specific place helplessly for example) and the other part of being in the world always have a chance to do something. These possibilities are reflected in projects targeted in the future. This is the deseint (or com cunt is written)
He has time, the entities who are not in the deseint are what they are.
This opening of the world always has an emotional stance. It puts understanding as an ontological condition in humans and involves seeing knowledge in a different way to tradition.
This opening up of world is not knowledge but understanding.
This is always a prior understanding.
It is moving from an epistemological approach to one ontological knowledge.
Heidegger begins to destroy the epistemological approach.
He gives the knowledge as a way of being in the world which implies an understanding and interpretation given prior knowledge. This interpretation is always because he has to move from a prior understanding.
The proposition is to affirm or deny something of something, what Heidegger said that to make propositions need something, what gives us the interpretation to understand something, what Heidegger called for the sake of
The whole field of logic has to do with the proposition.
7 – Explain the concept of language game, according to Wittgenstein‘s language game corresponds to a theory that the author of a meaning. The meaning of linguistic expressions is inseparable from the use we talked about him, and in turn use is linked to social practices, which means using the words in different contexts.
The meaning is fluid and will change as we occupy these expressions in different contexts and practices.
This approach estrcturista and antiescencialista because it is a changing meaning. The truth or falsity occurs in contexts of language game.
Wingestein is more explicit in Heidegger’s way of understanding the concept.
Instead of a conpceto community, there is a family space and connections are enabling us to direct connections.
This approach to see the diversity in relation to knowledge, the consequences are similar to those of Heidegger.
8 – Explain the concept of productivity in the distance in time, Gadamer, involves an approach, a development of Heidegger’s thoughts. There is a progressive development of hermeneutics, however, is both a conpceto vinula same understanding. It is about understanding other cultures, is a sense that originates in the subjects. Interiors are expressions that are expressed.
Gadamer criticizes this approach because it assumes that you may know, the compression that takes any phenomenon is linked to the temporality of the interpreter. Always understand from prejudices from our perspective that gives us being in the world.
These senses can not be known originating originally because we understand with prejudice. We have from different interpretations of the same phenomena. For Gadamer the time is opening new meaning to the phenomena, while there is time and events will give us access to directions then the distance in time produces senses.
Point pk reasons we can say that Marx or Freud, go beyond the dichotomy between explanation and understanding:
Explaining and understanding in the social sciences represents a dilemma.
Marx and Freud avoided this dilemma and posed a concept of the object of social sciences. The salary is a kind of understanding that exists between a capitalist and a worker, which is a false understanding and beyond Marx, which is a theory that allows you to show that this relationship is not like buying the capitalist force work having no equivalent exchange, where the worker is obliged to sell their labor power.
This understanding is solidly daily false necessarily have a relationship of justice and equality.
There are two distinctions of meaning and explanation
In Freud we start from the meaning as expressed in the manifest. This everyday understanding we have, a sort of hieroglyphics to be deciphered, so we must go beyond the everyday by means of the theory.
This involves going beyond use a technique called free association is something that happens by reflection, where for the latent content.
In Freud appears as the latent becomes manifest, with 4 procedures in which the most important are the condensation and displacement.
In Freud is clearly an articulation of the psychical with understanding and interpretation.
Expose the three way of understanding the relation of social science and social practice:
There are three ways:
–
Positivism
An expression of social phenomena that are the expression of certain laws (nomological deductive)
-Structuralism: we must explain and not understand what is the relationship between science and social practice?
It allows us to expand our knowledge as a means of achieving objectives and delivering specific purposes.
The second way is critical theory has to do with emancipation, which requires changing the conception of values.
In social reality itself is a tension between what one wants to be and what it is.
And the third is the approach of Foucault, where the social sciences arise from a relationship where control power, a society where certain sisciplinaria institutions generate knowledge from the panoptic discipline
1Exponga the fundamental ideas of Descartes and Galileo on science
A-Both authors acknowledge that it is essential that knowledge is a certainty
Galileo:
certainty required to science, it also leads to the method of observation. This produces a tension due to the uncertainty of the observations.
Some observations are deceptive, as that the sun revolves around the earth as older plants (this is a structural tension as they guide you in the comments, also raises the idea of celestial bodies.
Descartes raises the certainty attached to reason, because it is rational.
“Certainty is about the clarity of reason of ideas
-Prevents make judgments without knowing for certain, the error arises from the trial.
The idea of Method: A procedure that allows not make judgments without certainty.
His absolute certainty: I think, therefore I am: clarity that comes from this truth first. (certainty and method: they characterize the concept of science)
B-Descartes and Galileo
There are two important ideas:
-certainty: Kant and Galileo required of science knowledge that is a certainty. (Raised by different shades)
Galileo: It requires scientific certainty and the other base of science are the observations. There is a contradiction because this is uncertain, there is an action that resolves Galilean his way.
Deceive us but from the viewpoint of the earth (the sun revolves around the earth, but in reality is the reverse)
This issue will remain, is an issue which is structurally tension as the sciences are based on the observations.
Desrcarte: The certainty is that evr with reason. It is the clarity of the division of sciences. When we have clear and distinct ideas are sure.
The error arises at trial and no possibility for error when ideas or thoughts, but arises when through these thoughts I trial.
The discard method is a procedure that preserves certain.
S first impression of the XVII => certainty.
Second idea is the method => consists of procedures that allow never take a false as true.
These two ideas characterize the concept of science (certainty and method)
Disposal: first and absolute certainty, which is I think and therefore I am
Explain in what sense we can say that the conception of science of logical positivism remains Cartesian
AEs Cartesian base while still seeking a method
“For them the whole problem of knowledge. It develops in the field of language
“The positiv. They tend to separate the metaphysics of science, argue that the metaphysical. It survives because there is insufficient language syntax.
First establish a methodology semantics pa `qe establish what has meaning and qe no. If you can not do that, you’re in the metaphysical field. And expressions that have no meaning (emits only sound without express anything)
cn-sense is only spoken in the area of prepositions (every philosophy of logical positivism through this.
“The metaphysics survives as in ordinary (pass something curious qe be avoided), expressions can be made syntactically correct but meaningless, since they are not observable propositions (are seudopropos). (X it persists metaphysical).
put another way, there is qe observable elements eg exoresiones with Peter, a cousin No, both observable without entity (may be diff. Actually). So + specifies expressed in logical atomism
– The task of posit. Logic is to develop a syntax for qe the language of science makes sense and q, the combination is made by combining entities.
– Logical positivism raises avoid metaphysics and meaning, is expressed in logical atomism, (every proposition is composed of other simpler) decompose the compound to simple, connecting with experience (method)
-The method determines the simple propositions connected = true experience.
-when proposic. Protocol are true is uncertain.
by the comments correspond to singular propositions.
B 2 – postivo Conception of course, still looking for the certainty of science under the base method.
S XIX all knowledge is created under or is placed under the language.
Positivists see that metaphysics to have survived to the extent that there is an inadequate language syntax.
The first thing they do is establish a semantic methodology to establish what is meaningful and what is not. But we do that we are in field of metaphysics and expressions that have no meaning. Since we are only emientiendo sound but do not express anything.
All philosophy is developed in this field of metaphysics.
Metaphysics has been sobreviviv because in the realm of ordinary language and produced a curious thing to be avoided, because here we can point expressions in the syntax is correct but makes no sense, since it is a proposition which is observable. It is a pathway by which metaphysics persists.
Another way is that there are expressions that contain elements that can be observed. Example: Pedro is a prime number, the two things are observable, but no entity (which may be different in reality)
This is expressed more specifically in logical atomism; linguistic expression.
The idea is to see whether the proposition is true or false should be breaking them down into simple propositions.
The truth of the molecular sentences depend on anatomical propositions.
All this requires all of these concepts. There is a method which must break down the proposals.
We have a base of science that is certain.
Then as we move from truth to the comments (have to do with time and place)
Discuss the model of explanation for legal coverage, in its two variants:
the positive. Q Logic formalized what is the scientific explanation-Hempel explains qe 2 variants of what is legal coverage:
-legal cover: it implies that explains the phenomenon under law
deductive-nomological (law deduction) dnde premise can explain what happened, is divided into 2: (facts and assumptions of the case pq) (initial conditions / universal law, not accept exceptions.
“Probabilistic deductive: it is a probabilistic law, dnde the relation of phenomenon occurs in a proportion of cases, so qe not assured and can not be inferred or predicted. (eg in 100, 90 true)
The models are accepted by the positivist causal models, where cause and effect link
B. Logical Positivists. Formulate what a scientific explanation, which was Hempel, states that there are 2 variants of what is legal ciobertura.
Legal coverage: it implies that explains the phenomenon under the law.
Deductive nomological (law-deduction) that actually has two sides (facts and assumptions as to why this happens)
Probabilistic deductive is a probabilistic law, where the ratio of phenomenon that occurs in a proportion of cases (eg in 100, 90 are true)
4. Explain the differences between logical and Popper postive about 1) basic statements of observation and 2) the objectivity of science:
A1.Para the logical positivists, experience (knowledge) is a given (proposic. Simple Science) and are true.
Popper denies both, since for the basic statements contain theory.
-theory even if they are unique since they are based in and contain it, are inseparable. Also are hypothetical, are not 100% true. With this comes the concept of empiricism, since it posits that all knowledge comes from experience.
Science has no basis for Popper is hypothetical.
2.La objectivity of science: the positivist proposic saying. Protocol, the experiences are based on sensory organs, qe cn connect linguistic experience.
Popper denies this, holding q objectivity is not related to science and qe is not in the true, but qe represents a resistance of validity in relation to criticism.
“Certainty is always linguistic. Popper and others resolves the tension in science, but removing the certainty and assuming the hypothetical nature of science.
B-4 – For the positivists, science is played by simple propositions, this relation corresponds to what knowledge is given.
“For Popper’s basic statements contain theory.
Although they are singular in some cases have theory, and that if they are theoretical, are hypothetical, are not verdaderdo dividends, for we know that for Popper, theories can not express, can not be true.
Popper This breaks down the concept of empiricism, since knowledge derived from experience that knowledge is.
-Objectivity of science. The protocol propositions positivtsas when they say, the experiences have to do with sensory organs that connect the language with experience.
Popper says that this is not true, he argued that objectivity is not related to science and not reside in the true, but is a strength of validity in relation to criticism.
Certainty is always linguistic. Here Popper and others resolve the tension of science but eliminating assumes certainty and hypothetical or fallible in science.