Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Fundamentals 2 > Lecture 10: the revenge of the rationalists > Flashcards

Lecture 10: the revenge of the rationalists Flashcards

1
Q

logical positivism fails because… (4 redenen)

A

– theoretical concepts are richer than summaries to observations & observations are not neutral: theory-ladenness
– Underdetermination of theory by observation
– the induction problem blocks verification of scientific statements
– Science is full of unobservable entities (which are supposed to be unverifiable)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q
  • Popper worked in a daycare center with
    Alfred Adler
  • Popper presented Adler with a case that
    he felt didn’t fit into Adler’s theory.
  • Adler explained the case by modifying his
    theory, showing great certainty
  • “Slightly shocked, I asked him how he
    could be so sure. ‘Because of my
    thousandfold experience’, he replied;
    whereupon I could not help saying: ‘And
    with this new case, I suppose, your
    experience has become thousand-and-
    one-fold.’” (Popper, 1978)
A

oke

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

“I found that those of my friends who were
admirers of Marx, Freud, and Adler, were
impressed by a number of points common to
these theories, and especially by their
apparent explanatory power…Once your eyes
were thus opened you saw confirming
instances everywhere: the world was full
of verifications of the theory. ” (Popper, 1978)

A

oke

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

wat vond popper dus over adler, freud en marx

A
  • These theories can explain all facts
  • This might sound as something
    wonderful…
  • Popper, however, realizes: This is not a
    strength, but a weakness!
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

wat gebeurde er net in de tijd dat popper actief was

A
  • In the same period Einstein posits the theory of relativity
  • This theory predicts that light deflects along a planet
  • The solar eclipse of 1919 enables Arthur Eddington to test the prediction
  • If the prediction didn’t come true, this would proof Einstein’s theory wrong
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

wat deed popper met dit ding van einstein

A
  • So Einstein’s theory excludes certain events
  • This is a strong theory exactly because it can not explain everything
  • Karl Popper recognizes that this marks the essence of science
  • After all, if you’re wrong, you can find out!
  • With a theory that can explain everything this is impossible
  • Such a theory is uninformative
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

induction en deduction verschil

A

induction: observation -> theory
deduction: theory -> observation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

wat zei popper over induction

A

induction is onmogelijk, maar ook niet noodzakelijk: instead we can do deduction (use theories to derive predictions about observations)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q
  • Theories are bold conjectures whose predictions can be tested against observations
  • Popper: theory-free observation is impossible, but is also not needed
  • Induction is impossible: you cannot induce theories from observations
  • But that is ok, because instead we can do deduction: theories can be used to derive predictions about observations!
A

oke

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

hoe vond popper dat je van theorie naar observatie moest gaan

A

theories are not constructed from observations (wat de logical positivists zeiden), but they emerge from a creative act. and then predictions are derived from this, which are tested on the basis of observation.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

dus wat was het grootste verschil tussen logical positivists en popper

A

logical positivists: empiricists, induction, observations -> theories

popper: rationalist, deduction, theory -> predictions (which are tested via observation)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

waarom denkt popper dat hij het induction problem heeft opgelost

A

because it doesnt really matter how the theory arises, the only scientific act is refutation. this can be done by deducing predictions from the theory that can then be tested. and deduction is logically valid!

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

hypothetico-deductive model=

A
  • start with theory
  • deduce predictions from theory
  • test these predictions
  • if these predictions dont come true: falsify
  • if they do come true: corroboration
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

corroborated theory =

A

(not the same as verification!!!)

a corroborated theory is one that is strong because it survived a risky test, but it is not accepted.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

even kijken naar blaadjes

A

oke

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

empirical cycle

A

observation - theory construction - prediction - test - evaluate - observation…

door adriaan de groot

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

wat vond popper over theory development

A

helemaal vrij, moet gewoon creatief gebeuren.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

popper vouched for hypothesis testing, werkte dus niet zo goed bij psychologie en filosofie (nu veel kritiek). popper is very normative (this is how you should do science), kuhn en lakatos meer descriptive (this is how science happens).

A

oke

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

popper tijdens…

A

ww2

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

waardoor werd popper eigenlijk aangezet

A

door een foutje in adler zijn theory

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

wat deed adler

A

explained all behaviour via inferiority complexes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

wat is een verschil tussen theorieen maken en testen

A

– context of discovery (there is no logic for theory development)
– context of justification (strict rules for the logic of testing: modus tollens)

dus theorie bedenken is heel vrij, theorie testen is heel strict.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

waarom is popper een rationalist

A

theories spring from the imagination, en daarna logisch over nadenken (part of the content of our theories comes from ratio, not from observation)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

wat is een verschil tussen popper en bijvoorbeeld plato

A
  • popper considers the ratio fallible
  • his version of rationalism is called critical rationalism (nog steeds populair)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

demarcation=

A

demarcation criterion distinguishes science from pseudoscience

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

wat was popper zijn demarcation criterion

A

falsification

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

falsification criterion=

A

statements or theories are scientific when they are in conflict with possible observations

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

a theory is scientific only…. (popper)

A

if the theory is falsifiable

29
Q

welke problemen lost dit falsification criterion op

A
  • induction (soort van)
  • infinite sets
  • unobservable entities
30
Q

Falsificationism is a normative theory that prescribes how science should be done

A

oke

31
Q

wat zijn degrees of falsifiability waar in kan worden gedifferentieerd

A
  • precise
  • general
32
Q

precise =

A

specific predictions

33
Q

general =

A
  • conditions
  • does it apply to a few, or a lot of people?
34
Q

more precise and more general theories exclude more, therefore they are more falsifiable -> greater informative content.

A

oke

35
Q

dus waar ben je naar op zoek bij deze situaties

A

de situatie die het meeste uitsluit, die het snelste kan worden gefalsificeerd. die is het “beste”

36
Q

A) All women wear a red t-shirt
B) All women with blue jeans and brown hair,
wear a red t-shirt

A

A is meer falsificeerbaar

37
Q

A) People who are primed with Einstein, score
higher on an IQ test.
B) People who are primed with Einstein and are not from Amsterdam and had a good night of sleep, score higher on an IQ test.

welke is beter en wat gebeurt er bij B?

A

A is beter, B is more conditional and therefore less general

38
Q

dus meer conditional (meer dingen waar het van afhangt) =

A

less general (en dus minder goed)

39
Q

A) All women wear a red t-shirt
B) All women wear a red t-shirt and blue jeans and have brown hair

welke is meer informative

A

B

40
Q

A) People who are primed with Einstein, score
higher on an IQ test.
B) People who are primed with Einstein, score 6 points higher on an IQ test.

A

B

41
Q

A) All women wear a red t-shirt
B) All women with blue jeans and brown hair,
wear a red t-shirt

A) All women wear a red t-shirt
B) All women wear a red t-shirt and blue jeans and have brown hair

welke B is meer precise, welke is meer general?

A

eerste B is less general
tweede B is meer precize (specific prediction)

42
Q

wat zijn problemen met falsification

A
  • popper cannot make a clear distinction between better supported and less supported theories
  • at best, theories are ‘not yet refuted’
  • hard falsification is very difficult
43
Q

duhem-quine thesis

A

if a prediction does not become true, it could be the theory or the measurement/test.

-> a theory is never tested in isolation, always with additional background assumptions

44
Q

wat is een implicatie van de duhem-quine thesis

A

hard falsification is impossible (you never know for sure whether your theory should be falsified, or that one or more background assumptions was wrong).

45
Q

dus de duhem quine problem is to… as … was to …

A

duhem quine problem - popper
induction problem - logical positivists

46
Q

wat is nog meer een lastig puntje aan poppers theorie

A
  • as a scientist you have to falsify your OWN theory
  • basically having bankers reducing their own bonuses, mensen zijn trots op wat ze hebben gemaakt en geloven hier in. gaan dit dus nooit 100% willen falsificeren.
47
Q

‘We should ring the bells of victory every
time a theory is refuted’ – Popper, 1946

A

oke

48
Q

popper says he has a normative theory, but does not describe examples of what we have considered as scientific successes.

A

dus falsificationism is not historically accurate

49
Q

dus 2 problemen popper

A
  • duhem quine thesis
  • geen differentiation between better and less supported theories
  • falsificationism is not historically accurate
50
Q
  • Historian Thomas Kuhn claims that science is not as the logical positivists (or Popper) claim
  • Against positivism: Theories often break with their predecessors
  • Paradigm shifts
  • For example: from Newton to Einstein
  • In this transition, the meaning of a term like “time” changes
A

oke

51
Q

Kuhns’ stages of science

A

– Pre-science
– Normal science I
– Anomalies and crisis
– Revolution
– Normal science II

52
Q
  • It is not entirely clear whether Kuhn believes in progress over paradigms. At least it is not
    guaranteed by the scientific method.
  • His book ‘the structure of scientific revolutions’ is the single most widely cited book in the social sciences
A

oke

53
Q

what movement emerges, that is associated with kuhn

A

relativism

54
Q

waarom kan je niet spreken van progress tijdens deze paradigm shifts

A
  • You cannot speak of scientific progress
    because if terms change meaning in theories,
    those theories are not even about the same
    thing
  • In another paradigm you see another world

dus je spreekt over compleet andere dingen.

Practicing in different worlds, the two groups of scientists see different things when they look from the same point in the same
direction

55
Q

kuhns paradigm =

A

all-encompassing schemes like Newtonian mechanics

56
Q

wat is lastig bij psychologie

A
  • Psychology actually only has local paradigms
  • And: paradigms in psychology seem to be
    mostly methodological rather than substantive
57
Q

Feyerabend writes the book Against Method…

A
  • Denies the existence of methodological guidelines ensuring progress in science
  • It is essential for scientific progress that anything is permitted: ‘anything goes’

-> you need a toolbox full of different kinds of tools, not only a hammer and pins.

58
Q

wat deed Lakatos

A

tried to save the rationality of science from both Kuhns relativism and Feyerabends anarchism. He combines normative elements of popper and descriptive elements of kuhns philosophy

want het leek net alsof er geen regels mochten zijn door Kuhn & Feyerabends

59
Q

wat zei lakatos over falsificationism

A
  • direct falsification will be very rare, often researchers do not want to give up their theories that easily.
  • but, when they have a better theory, they will switch.
  • therefore there is still a role for falsification as demarcation, but it is not a descriptive principle
  • if something is really not falsifiable, it should not be in science. but if it is, does not mean that it is a good theory
  • paradigm and research programme can exist next to each other
60
Q

wat heeft een theory volgens lakatos

A
  • a core
  • body of beliefs
  • negative heuristics
  • positive heuristic
61
Q

body of beliefs =

A

beliefs that help the theory (=auxillary assumptions)

62
Q

wat correspondeert met de duhem quine thesis

A

auxillary assumptions

63
Q

negative heuristic

A
  • you can never change the core, if you change the core you have to falsify the theory
  • you can change the body of beliefs around it
64
Q

voorbeeld van general intelligence

A

core: g exists
assumptions: unidimensional, latent, etc

65
Q

progressive research programmes kenmerken

A
  • growth
  • new techniques
  • more facts
66
Q

degenerative research programmes

A
  • shrinkage
  • no new techniques
  • no increase in facts
67
Q

normative component of Lakatos=

A

a rational scientist should stick with a progressive programme, but abandon a degenerative programme

68
Q
  • Popper formulates the falsification criterion
  • Avoids the induction problem and solves the demarcation problem better than the logical positivists
  • Problems for falsification lie in the Duhem-Quine thesis and that falsificationism provides a poor description of scientific practice
  • Kuhn argues that scientific revolutions imply shifts in meaning: successive theories are concerned with something different
  • Feyerabend argues that strict norms are in the way of scientific progress, it is essential for scientific progress that “anything goes”
  • Lakatos formulates the sophisticated falsificationism to save the rationality in science and brings back a normative component in his descriptive analysis
A

oke

69
Q
A

Fundamentals 2 (9 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions