1

Programa de Maestra en Gestin de

Tecnologas de Informacin y Comunicacin
(M-GTIC)

Nombre del Curso:

Filosofa de la Ciencia
(Philosophy of Science)
Instructor:
Marvin Arias Olivas, PhD
E-mail: marvin.arias@uni.edu.ni,
marao@ibw.com.ni
Universidad Nacional de Ingeniera (UNI)
Managua, Nicaragua

1
2
What is this
thing called
Science?
Qu es
esa cosa
llamada
Ciencia?
UNIDAD IV : TEORIAS COMO ESTRUCTURAS
Contenido
Introduction
Paradigms and normal science
The function of normal science and revolutions
The merits of Kuhns account of science
Objective knowledge
Lakatoss Research programs
Novel predictions
Testing the Methodology againts history
3
Theories as Structures
Kuhn (1962): Science can be Normal or
Revolutionary
4
I have argued so far only that
paradigms are constitutive of
science. Now I wish to display
a sense in which they are
constitutive of nature as well .

(Thomas Kuhn 1922-1996)
Source: The Structure of Scientific
Revolutions (1962)
One reason why there is seen to be a need to view theories
as structures stems from the history of science.

The notion can be further enhanced by reflecting on the fact
that for a couple of centuries after Newton, physics was
carried out in the Newtonian framework, until that
framework was challenged by relativity and quantum
theory at the beginning of the last century.

One such alternative is the view that concepts acquire their
meaning by way of a definition.

Introduction: Theories as Structures
5






Introduction: Theories as Structures
A key feature is the emphasis placed on the revolutionary
character of scientific progress,

A revolution involves the abandonment of one theoretical
structure and its replacement by another, incompatible one.

The way a science progresses can be summarised by the
following open-ended scheme:

pre-science - normal science - crisis - revolution
new normal science - new crisis
6
7
Normal Science
Normal science' means research firmly
based upon one or more past scientific
achievements, achievements that some
particular scientific community acknowledges
for a time as supplying the foundation for its
further practice.

Thomas S. Kuhn

The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962).
8
What is a Paradigm?
Paradigm comes from Greek "" (paradeigma),
"pattern, example, sample"

Model to Way to understand
follow up by the world, explain it
a scientific and manipulate it
community

Way to solve Universal scientific
Problems and achievements recog-
mode to give nized for some time.
solutions







Paradigm




9
What is a Paradigm?
A scientific paradigm, in the most basic sense of
the word, is a framework containing all of the
commonly accepted views about a subject, a
structure of what direction research should take and
how it should be performed.

Thomas Kuhn suggested that a paradigm defines
the practices that define a scientific discipline at
certain point in time. He also postulated that
paradigms are discrete and culturally based.
10
Normal Science



11
What is a paradigm according to Kuhn?

A paradigm is made up of the general theoretical
assumptions and laws and the techniques for their
application that the members of a particular scientific
community adopt.

Paradigms do not build on each other; a new
paradigm negates an older paradigm and renders
useless all of the knowledge gained through research
conducted according to the earlier assumptions.
Paradigms and normal science
Paradigms and normal science
12
A paradigm, therefore, determines not only a set of
beliefs about the world.

It also defines what counts as good science, and
even determines what counts as a scientific fact.

It is a conceptual framework that determines how the
world looks to those who have accepted it.

It defines not only the scientific outlook for
practitioners of a particular science, but also the
scientific form of life.
Paradigms and normal science
13

There are two aspects to the history of any science:

Normal science: science pursued within the constraints of a
particular paradigm, without questioning its principles. The
characteristic activity is puzzle solving,

Revolutionary science: a time of decreasing confidence in
the existing paradigm (because of the accumulation of
unsolved puzzles), and conflict with alternative paradigms.

This is like a political crisis, with uncertainty, and conflict
among many views, until a new order becomes established
and a single paradigm takes a position of authority.
14
Paradigms and normal science


The function of normal Science and
Revolutions
15
Normal science involves detailed attempts to articulate a
paradigm with the aim of improving the math between it and
nature.

It is research based upon past scientific achievement
acknowledged by a scientific community as foundational for
its further practice.

Examples of such achievements are Newton's Principia,
and Lavoisier's chemistry.


Some philosophical claims arising from Kuhns view:

The conflict among paradigms cant be settled on any rational
methodological grounds, because each paradigm contains its
own view of rational scientific methodology.

The conflict cant be resolved by an appeal to the facts, since
each paradigm contains a view of what counts as a fact, and
will determine how its adherents view the facts.

Different paradigms are in fact incommensurable, not
comparable by any neutral standard. Adherents of different
paradigms live in different worlds, and speak different
languages that are not inter-translatable.
16
The merits of Kuhns account of Science
A change of paradigm involves changes in the meanings of
basic theoretical terms.
The replacement of one paradigm by another cant be viewed
as progressive on any objective grounds.

Since adherents of different paradigms define the questions
differently, and accept different standards for a good answer,
the conflict between them has no neutral resolution.

A scientific revolution has to be regarded as a social and
psychological phenomenon rather than as a purely
intellectual one. For an individual scientist, the change in
point of view is more like a religious conversion than a
rational process of comparing theories against the facts.
17
The merits of Kuhns account of Science
Some historical claims arising from Kuhns view:

Scientists with different theoretical viewpoints generally fail to
understand one another.

Competing paradigms appeal to different and conflicting
sets of facts, and proceed by conflicting methods.

The arguments made in favor of one theory cannot be fully
understood by, or persuasive for , adherents of the other.

New paradigms introduce new theoretical terms, or change
the meanings of old ones, in ways that are incomprehensible
to anyone who doesnt already accept the new theory.
18
The merits of Kuhns account of Science
A new paradigm doesnt explain more than its
predecessor. Even if it can explain things that the old
theory couldnt, it will typically fail to explain many things
that the old theory could explain. (This has been called
Kuhn loss.


The history of science is not cumulative: new theories
cant incorporate the successes of older ones, because
they have a completely different view of what counts as
success. The new theory redefines the old theory in its
own terms.
19
The merits of Kuhns account of Science
Kuhns list of values for judging scientific theories:
Accuracy: degree of agreement with the available empirical
data
Consistency: freedom from logical contradictions
Simplicity: lack of unnecessary complication; unity
Scope: Range of phenomena that fall within the theorys
grasp
Fruitfulness: Power to generate new principles, problems,
solutions, predictions, etc.
Question: Does agreement on these values imply agreement
on their application, their relative importance, etc?
20
The merits of Kuhns account of Science
The Copernican Revolution
The Copernican Universe
21


22
What is objective knowledge and why is it relevant to
Kuhn's theory?

On the one hand, Kuhn is aware of the fact that a scientific
revolution extends over a considerable period of time
involving much theoretical and experimental work.


On the other hand, Kuhn's comparisons between
paradigm change and gestalt switches or religious
conversions make immediate sense of the idea that the
change takes place "all at once".
Objective Knowledge


23
What is objective knowledge and why is it relevant to
Kuhn's theory?
Knowledge can be construed as objective by taking of the
objectives properties of statements, especially statements of
theoretical and observational claims.

The relevant to Kuhns theory is that not only such statements
that are objective.

Experimental set-ups and procedures, methodological rules
and mathematical systems are objective too, in the sense that
they are distinct from the kinds of things that reside in
individual minds. They can be confronted and can be
exploited, modified and criticized by individuals.
Objective Knowledge
Objective Knowledge

Lakatoss research programs revisited
Lakatos defines a research program as having a hard core
and a protective belt, and he specifies heuristic rules that tell
us how to deal with the hard core and a protective belt. We
can illustrate this by considering the Copernican theory.

The hard core of the Copernican theory is that the earth is
spinning on its axis and that the planets revolve around the
sun. The hard core of Copernican theory is different of the
earth-centered Ptolemic theory it replaced.

For Ptolemy the central assumptions were that the earth was
stationary and the sun, moon and planets rotated around the
earth.

25

Lakatoss research programs revisited




The protective belt of the Copernican theory is other
auxiliary, less crucial assumptions that are required in order
to the theory work. Copernicus assumed that the planets
moved in epicycles.

This was needed by him to make specific predictions.
However Kepler modified this protective belt assumption in
the Copernican theory by suggesting the planets moved in
elliptical orbits around the sun.

Newton modified the protective belt further by suggesting
that the sun also moved a little.
26

Lakatoss research programs revisited




The negative heuristic of the Copernican research program
tells us that we cannot violate the central (hard core) of the
Copernican theory without rejecting the program.

The positive heuristic it requires that anyone who modifies
the protective belt of a research program must do so in order
to widen the scope of explanation of the program as well as
predict some novel phenomenon.

Thus Kepler rejected Copernicuss claim that planets moved
in epicycles and proposed that they moved in ellipses.
Therefore, increased the scope of applicability of Copernicus
theory.
27
Lakatos:

One program is superior to another insofar as it is a
more successful predictor of novel phenomena.

A program is progressive to the extent that it
makes natural, as opposed to novel, predictions that
are confirmed, where "natural" stands opposed to
"contrived" or "ad hoc".theory.
Novel predictions
28
2012 M. Arias
Lakatos shared Kuhn's concern with the history of
science.

Lakatos's methodology can be used to
meaningfully compare research programs.

In this connection, Lakatos came to make a
distinction between the appraisal of research
programs, which can only be done with historical
hindsight, and advice to scientists, which he denied
it was the purpose of his methodology to offer.

Testing the methodology againts history
29
References
What is this thing called Science?(Chapter 8 & 9).

An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science:
Theory and Reality (Chapter 5 & 6).

Philosophy of Science: The Central Issues
Martin Curd and J. A. Cover (Chapter 2)



30