Current ratio
6 years ago
Friday 15 January 2010
Presentations, quotations
This weeks TOK demonstrated a number of very good reminders of best practice. If you saw Karl, Sofia and Daria today then you were able to see what an A grade student does. They were on time with their presentation, they were confident enough to step up and talk, they were creative in both their preparation and during their respective presentations and each of them had a quality TOK moment (in fact Sofia had two (one of which made my head ache!)!). However my personal favourite was Daria's quotation within here final panel of her cartoon strip, I reproduce it here, well done all 3 of you. "Time is the best falsifier" -Brilliant!
Saturday 9 January 2010
Reason, does God exist?
Although the ideas here are time consuming to read through, it is a good demonstration of a logically constructed argument. This article might just make future debates about the likelihood of "God" more interesting.
Thursday 7 January 2010
sciences, methods
Empirical evidence is evidence we have tested by observing something ourself via our senses. As we have seen in the different way we process sensory information, our perception is not always 100% reliable, so a way of testing empirical evidence is provided by following a scientific approach.
This week we have looked at 4 possible approaches to explain the true scientific method.
These are:
Inductivism.
Falsification.
Paradigms.
Anarchist.
The original scientific methods were best described perhaps as inductivism and is a simplistic approach discussed by David Hume amonst others. It means if you observe an event and a cause/ occurence many times then a general statement of likelihood of cause can be set up and either described as true or false. As we will discover when we study issues with reasoning, inductive logic leads to mistakes in assumptions and the occurence of the fallacy of induction. (A fallacy means an unexpected mistake).
Falsification is the usual and most respected idea about the scientific method. YOU MUST TRY TO REMEMBER THIS (!)idea. It was published by Karl Popper. It means in science you make an observation and suggest a theory. You then disprove all other possible explanations leaving your theory as the most trustworthy.
Paradigm theory refers to a belief put forward by Kuhn, that scientists in reality are guided in their viewpoints and by underlying belief systems. They are unwitting slaves to their deep held beliefs and therefore cling to much to personal hypothesis and are ego driven in defence of their theories. This is an interesting idea when you consider why it took so long for theories such as evolution to be generally accepted, and perhaps why counter theories to global warming are dismissed very quickly by most.
Anarchist theory published by Paul Feyeraband and in this Feyeraband argues that actually most scientific discoveries have been down to chance and serendipity, that anything useful has been found by initial mistakes and subsequent sagacity to spot an opportunity.
This week we have looked at 4 possible approaches to explain the true scientific method.
These are:
Inductivism.
Falsification.
Paradigms.
Anarchist.
The original scientific methods were best described perhaps as inductivism and is a simplistic approach discussed by David Hume amonst others. It means if you observe an event and a cause/ occurence many times then a general statement of likelihood of cause can be set up and either described as true or false. As we will discover when we study issues with reasoning, inductive logic leads to mistakes in assumptions and the occurence of the fallacy of induction. (A fallacy means an unexpected mistake).
Falsification is the usual and most respected idea about the scientific method. YOU MUST TRY TO REMEMBER THIS (!)idea. It was published by Karl Popper. It means in science you make an observation and suggest a theory. You then disprove all other possible explanations leaving your theory as the most trustworthy.
Paradigm theory refers to a belief put forward by Kuhn, that scientists in reality are guided in their viewpoints and by underlying belief systems. They are unwitting slaves to their deep held beliefs and therefore cling to much to personal hypothesis and are ego driven in defence of their theories. This is an interesting idea when you consider why it took so long for theories such as evolution to be generally accepted, and perhaps why counter theories to global warming are dismissed very quickly by most.
Anarchist theory published by Paul Feyeraband and in this Feyeraband argues that actually most scientific discoveries have been down to chance and serendipity, that anything useful has been found by initial mistakes and subsequent sagacity to spot an opportunity.
Science, Baloney detection kit
Michael Shermer is the founder of the skeptics society and bases the ideas here and below upon original work by Carl Sagan, who now recently deceased was and still is one of the USA's most well known and globally respected scientists. In his book "the Demon Haunted world" he presents his baloney (meaning nonsense) detection kit. It is used by skeptics to find good science and to dismiss bad or psuedoscience. This clip below gives a good introduction. The kit is useful for us to help us establish knowledge that is trustworthy.
These ideas are useful for our discussion and the essay title: Art upsets; science reassures. Discuss.
You can see a written summary of these arguments here
Michael Shermer states further:
Clearly, there are no foolproof methods of detecting baloney or drawing the boundary between science and pseudoscience. Yet there is a solution: science deals in fuzzy fractions of certainties and uncertainties, where evolution and big bang cosmology may be assigned a 0.9 probability of being true, and creationism and UFOs a 0.1 probability of being true. In between are borderland claims: we might assign superstring theory a 0.7 and cryonics a 0.2. In all cases, we remain open-minded and flexible, willing to reconsider our assessments as new evidence arises. This is, undeniably, what makes science so fleeting and frustrating to many people; it is, at the same time, what makes science the most glorious product of the human mind.
The Author:
Michael Shermer is founding publisher of Skeptic magazine and author of
The Borderlands of Science.
These ideas are useful for our discussion and the essay title: Art upsets; science reassures. Discuss.
You can see a written summary of these arguments here
Michael Shermer states further:
Clearly, there are no foolproof methods of detecting baloney or drawing the boundary between science and pseudoscience. Yet there is a solution: science deals in fuzzy fractions of certainties and uncertainties, where evolution and big bang cosmology may be assigned a 0.9 probability of being true, and creationism and UFOs a 0.1 probability of being true. In between are borderland claims: we might assign superstring theory a 0.7 and cryonics a 0.2. In all cases, we remain open-minded and flexible, willing to reconsider our assessments as new evidence arises. This is, undeniably, what makes science so fleeting and frustrating to many people; it is, at the same time, what makes science the most glorious product of the human mind.
The Author:
Michael Shermer is founding publisher of Skeptic magazine and author of
The Borderlands of Science.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
