Module 3

Question 1

What are the 2 Problems with the verification principle?

Answer 1

1. Theoretical Concepts
   - Theoretical concepts do not meet Carnap’s principle of logical reducibility
   - Theoretical concepts are often necessary to express a theory but they cannot be reduced
   - Theoretical concepts are multifaceted and dependent upon a system of other statements
2. Problem of Induction
   - we cannot infer anything about the future from what we know about the present or past
   - the verification principle is not Dynamic enough to account for changes in the state of the world

Question 2

What constitutes a well defined concept?

Answer 2

• Is based on solid theoretical arguments
• that explain the intension of that concept
• and that denote all and only cases of that concept in reality

Question 3

What are the types of concepts normally seen in social sciences?

Answer 3

Reflective concepts –> are expressed in their indicators

Formative concepts –> are constructed from their indicators

Question 4

Define Indicators

Answer 4

an indicator is a measurable or observable sign, variable or characteristic that represents and abstract concept in scientific research

Question 5

Under what conditions can theoretical concepts be allowed in a system of knowledge

Answer 5

IF AND ONLY IF

1. These concepts explain something in the facts that is NOT apparent from observation alone (x–>y but also explain why x–>y)
2. The use of these concepts leads to the development of new knowledge to be tested

Question 6

State all the porblems of INDUCTION

Answer 6

HUME’S PROBLEM OF INDUCTION
inductive reasoning lacks a rational justification because we cannot prove that the future will resemble the past

LOGICAL POSITIVISM’S RELIANCE ON EMPIRICAL VERIFICATION
a statement is meaningful only if it can be empirically verified but scientific laws rely on induction, which cannot be strictly verified

CARNAP’S ATTEMPTED SOLUTION: PROBABILITY AND CONFIRMATION THEORY
science does not “prove” laws but assigns increasing probability to them based on repeated observations

POPPER’S CRITIQUE: FALSIFICATION INSTEAD OF VERIFICATION
science does not confirm theories but only falsifies them, making deductive falsification (not inductive verification) the true demarcation criterion for science

THE COLLAPSE OF LOGICAL POSITIVISM
the induction process remained unsolved and since the verification principle itself was neither empirically verifiable nor logically necessary, logical positivism faced self-regulation and eventually declined

Question 7

Describe Deduction

Answer 7

deduction is truth-preserving: new information CANNOT change the true value of the conclusion anymore

!! the conclusion is given once the premises are given !!

Question 8

Describe Induction

Answer 8

new information can change the truth value of the conclusion

Question 9

What is the difference between induction and deduction

Answer 9

Deduction is an analytical transformation of what we already know, while induction is not

Question 10

Describe Freudian psycho-analysis

Answer 10

A theory designed to explain human behavior through concepts like the unconscious, repression, and defense mechanisms

PROBLEM:
no matter what happened, Freud’s framework had an explanation, making the framework too flexible, accomodating all possible outcomes, which meant it was never truly tested

Question 11

Describe Popper’s view on closed systems of knowledge

Answer 11

Closed systems –> every piece of evidence could be explained within their framework

Popper’s view

while these might be meaningful as social or psychological frameworks but they did not operate like TRUE SCIENCE (sciences whose theories can also be proven to be false)

Question 12

Describe Falsificationism

Answer 12

1. Science is about making bold predictions that could be wrong.
   “science is about proving things to be false”
2. Theories that can never be proven false are not scientific.
   “theories are scientific only if these could potentially be proven false”
3. Science progresses by eliminating bad theories
   “science advances by proposing bold new ideas (conjectures) and then looking for ways to disprove them (refutations)”

4.No scientific theory is ever final - it remains tentative
“empirical evidence is always open to revision therefore theories are just the best explanation we have right now”

5. Good science welcomes refutation; pseudoscience dodges it
   “pseudoscience survive because followers adjust the theory whenever evidence contradicts it, instead of rejecting the theory”