Upload
rosamund-tracey-horton
View
215
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Consequences of Revolution:
World Changes, Incommensurability, and Scientific Progress
Introduction to Philosophy ; Phil 11Rasmus Grønfeldt Winther
November 12, 2014
Paradigms as Mapsas a vehicle for scientific theory… [a paradigm] functions by telling the scientist about the entities that nature does and does not contain and about the ways in which those entities behave. That information provides a map whose
details are elucidated by mature scientific research. And since nature is too complex and varied to be explored at random,
that map is as essential as observation and experiment to science’s continuing development. Through the theories
they embody, paradigms prove to be constitutive of the research activity. They are also, however, constitutive of
science in other [“normative”] respects… paradigms provide scientists not only with a map but also with some of the
directions essential for map-making. In learning a paradigm the scientist acquires theory, methods, and
standards together, usually in an inextricable mixture. (Kuhn SSR 109)
Kuhn’s view
Immature Science
Paradigm + Normal Science
Anomalies
Crisis + New Paradigm
Revolution
Thomas Kuhn
Adapted from a ppt by John Oakes, Grossmont College
World Changes?Realist position: “Many readers will.. want to say that what changes with a paradigm is
only the scientist’s interpretation of observations that themselves are fixed once and for all by the nature of the environment
and the perceptual apparatus. …Aristotle and Galileo both saw pendulums, but they
differed in their interpretations of what they both had seen. ” (SSR, 120)Constructivist position: “I am… acutely
aware of the difficulties created by saying that when Aristotle and Galileo looked at swinging
stones, the first saw constrained fall, the second a pendulum. …we must learn to make sense of… though the world does not change
with a change paradigm, the scientist afterward works in a different world. ” (121,
rearranged)
World
Models/Paradigms
Models/Paradigms
World(s?)
Why and whence the fuss?But is sensory experience fixed and neutral?
Are theories simply man-made interpretations of given data? The
epistemological viewpoint that has most often guided Western philosophy for three
centuries dictates an immediate and unequivocal, Yes! In the absence of a
developed alternative, I find it impossible to relinquish entirely that viewpoint. Yet it no
longer functions effectively, and the attempts to make it do so through the introduction of a neutral language of
observations now seem to me hopeless. (SSR, 125)
…language…embodies a host of expectations about nature and fails to
function the moment these expectations are violated. (127)
World
Models/Paradigms
Models/Paradigms
World(s?)
World Changes: Kuhn as Constructivist or
Waffler?1. “…may make us wish to say that, after Copernicus, astronomers lived in a different
world.” (SSR, 117)
2. “…will urge us to say that after discovering oxygen, Lavoisier worked in a different
world” (118)
3. “When [the chemical revolution] was done…the data themselves had changed. That is the last of the senses in which we may want to say that after a revolution
scientists work in a different world.” (134)
Collected by Ian Hacking, p. xxviii
World
Models/Paradigms
Models/Paradigms
World(s?)
World Changes: Possible Integration?
…the network of new regularities accessible to
genius in the world determined jointly by
nature and by the paradigms upon which
Galileo and his contemporaries had been
raised.” (SSR, 125)
World & Paradigm Changes?
IncommensurabilityMathematical sense: the ratio of lengths of two line segments is
irrational – no common measure
Kuhn’s sense: “incommensurability of the pre- and postrevolutionary normal-scientific traditions” include
1.IncStandards “Their standards or their definitions of science are not the same. “ (SSR, 147)
2.IncConcepts “Within the new paradigm, old terms, concepts, and experiments fall into new relationships one with the other.” (148)3.IncWorlds “…the proponents of competing paradigms practice
their trades in different worlds.”(149)
IncConcepts: “Mass”
What is M’s mass as its velocity v increases, approaching light’s speed, c?
M’s mass remains the same:Mv = M0
M’s mass changes thus:Mv = M0
What is the relation between mass and the concept of “energy”?
Only indirect relationships, in which mass figures in equations for potential and kinetic energy.
A direct relationship, famously:EO = M0c2
1. Can we even remotely say that the concept “mass” plays the same role in
Newtonian vs. Einsteinian theory?Kuhn (and Feyerabend) famously argued
“no!”
2. Could Newtonian physics have won over relativity?
Kuhn should be willing to say “yes!”
A dead IncConcept.
IncConcepts: “God”What does “God” mean, under different “paradigms” (religions)?
Krishna(Vishwarupa form,
Singapore)
Buddha(Sarnath, UP, India, 4th
century CE)
(Christian) God (Michelangelo, c.
1512)
IncConcepts: “Species”What does “Species” mean,
under Linnaean and Darwinian paradigms?
Clearly defined species – natural kinds with essences
Species stable
(Limited) ∆: climate, food, environmental change
Varieties and species gradate into one another, and are ultimately all related by descent
Species evolve
∆: natural and sexual selection
A live IncConcept.
Progress across Paradigms?
Why change paradigms? “There must… be a basis, though it need be neither rational nor ultimately correct, for faith in the particular
candidate chosen.” “…there is no single argument that can or should persuade them
all.” (SSR, 157)
What is a scientific community? 1. they “solve problems about the behavior of nature,” 2. they work on “problems of detail,” 3.
“prohibition of appeals to heads of state or to the populace at large in matters scientific,” 4. “…by virtue of their shared training and
experience, [they] are the sole possessors of the rules of the game or of some equivalent basis for unequivocal judgments” (167)
Is there a goal? There is an “evolution from primitive beginnings… but nothing that has been or will be said makes it a process of
evolution toward anything. (171)
Discussion Questions1. Why is nature not the highest epistemological authority?
1. How could science not possibly progress in terms of knowledge and truth?
1. How could scientific change be determined by subjective and arrational factors?
1. Is there no communication across paradigms?
1. Methodologically speaking, has Kuhn been honest to the history of science? (see first sentence of SSR, 1) Is history
itself “fixed and neutral”?