PHILOS 8 Lecture Notes - Lecture 8: Normal Science, Protoscience

35 views6 pages
9 Feb 2017
School
Department
Course
Professor

For unlimited access to Class Notes, a Class+ subscription is required.

26
Kuhn: famous for making history relevant to the phi-
losophy of science
- 2 types of science: normal & evolutionary science
(most science is normal science)
- much easier to shoot down a theory (all you need is
one counterexample to refute a generalization)
- Popper: scientists should always be sticking their
necks out and try and disprove theories (and move
on to next ones as they disprove) ~ renting fancy
cars and crashing
- “THE” scientific method is flawed as science has
bunch of different fields and methods to its own dif-
ferent categories
- proto-science --> paradigm is reduced --> normal
science --> anomalies accumulate to a critical mass
and science goes into crisis
-paradigm: a good example (in ordinary English)
LECTURE 8
Unlock document

This preview shows pages 1-2 of the document.
Unlock all 6 pages and 3 million more documents.

Already have an account? Log in
27
-paradigm for Kuhn: occasionally a really good example of something / a
set of basic assumptions and a set of research methods (that can differ
from field to field) / a package of claims and methods
- paradigm in the narrow sense: an example of science done well (a pat-
tern for other people to emulate) ~ one person’s accomplishment at a
particular time, perhaps introducing a new method or something new
that motivates / inspires future scientific work in that field (so that it be-
comes a paradigm in the broad sense)
- puzzle-solving: most of science is just puzzle-solving / we have confidence
that if we apply the rules and the tools long enough, we will get a solution,
close that open question and move on to a new one (we know how the
game is played, now we just have to play it)
- anomaly: weird motions in the orbit of planets not explainable by tradi-
tional science / a violation of a law (a replicable violation / a break down in
our current understanding that you can see and observe over and over
again)
- descriptive vs. normative questions: is Kuhn saying that science IS done this
way or SHOULD be done in this way?
- Kuhn: this picture of the bulk of scientific research is both descriptive
AND normative and this is a really good thing that science works this
way so that science is not this disorganized mess because we would al-
ways be arguing on basic principles and not get anywhere. This would
make science philosophy as we would be constantly giving up our last
best idea about how the world is (threw a theory out and start from
scratch = disastrous). If you don’t give a theory a run for its money, sci-
ence is never going to get anywhere. Even though we should be
open-minded and question everything, that is what philosophers do, a
scientist cannot be expected to do that as that would not get us any-
where and would not give us a deeper, intellectual understanding of
the world.
Unlock document

This preview shows pages 1-2 of the document.
Unlock all 6 pages and 3 million more documents.

Already have an account? Log in

Get access

Grade+
$10 USD/m
Billed $120 USD annually
Homework Help
Class Notes
Textbook Notes
40 Verified Answers
Study Guides
1 Booster Class
Class+
$8 USD/m
Billed $96 USD annually
Homework Help
Class Notes
Textbook Notes
30 Verified Answers
Study Guides
1 Booster Class