Philosophy of Science

1. Philosophy of Science Richard Feynman 1918-1988 Thomas Kuhn 1922-1996 Karl Popper 1902 1994

2. The Philosophy of Science Problem What is science? What is good science? Is science a purely rational enterprise in which over time knowledge moves closer to the truth? Is psychology a science? What types of methods for gaining knowledge are scientific and what kinds of methods are not scientific? What kinds of concepts are admissible in science? May we use hypothetical concepts in science (gravity, mind, dark matter, mental representation, consciousness), or must all scientific concepts denote directly observable phenomena? 2

3. What is Philosophy of Science? Philosophy of science is the branch of philosophy that studies the philosophical assumptions, foundations, and implications of science, including the formal sciences, natural sciences, and social sciences. Science is a method, not to be confused with the content or subject matter of any particular science. 2

4. Theory Dependence of Observation Observation involves perception, and so is in part a psychological process. One does not make an observation passively, but is actively involved in distinguishing the thing being observed from surrounding sensory data. Therefore, observations depend on some underlying understanding of the way in which the world functions and that understanding may influence what is perceived, noticed, or deemed worthy of consideration. 2

5. What Do You See? 2

6. Thomas Kuhn: Paradigms A set of assumptions that a community of scientists share. All scientific work is based on the paradigm. 2

7. From Your Text “The history of science is also the story of discoveries and insights that were initially rejected” “An idea too unorthodox for one time and place may be readily received a generation later” “The dominant theoretical position in a scientific field may obstruct or prohibit consideration of new viewpoints. A theory may be believed so strongly by the majority of scientists that any investigation of new issues or methods is stifled” “Findings that contradict or oppose current thinking may be rejected by a journal’s editors, who function as gatekeepers or censors, enforcing conformity of thought by dismissing or trivializing revolutionary ideas….” 2

8. Paradigm: Examples 2) Mental disorders as abnormalities 1) Behaviorism vs Cognitive psychology 3) The psychological measurement paradigm 2

9. Ideas That Influence the Paradigm 2) Mechanism 1) Reductionism 3) Determinism 4) Methodological Individualism 2

10. How Paradigms Change A paradigm war occurs when the assumptions on which the old paradigm is founded are challenged Kuhn argues that paradigms change as a consequence of paradigm wars This is an unpleasant time involving loss of careers power, influence and worse. Many if not most challenges fail. According to Kuhn, if the new paradigm wins, it is not any closer to the truth than the old, just different. It wins because the argument in its favor is stronger, not because it fits reality any better. 2

11. Paradigms vs. Zeitgeist It is a set of assumptions, ideas, beliefs, ideologies, etc, that deeply influence what we think, believe and how we behave as members of a society or culture. Zeitgeist….very roughly….the spirit of the times. You are taught this idea from the very beginnings of your courses in psychology as the general behaviorist, social psychology and psychoanalytic idea that the situation is a very powerful determinant of behaviour. Although the zeitgeist is a very powerful influence on us, we are often not aware that it even exists. 2

12. Zeitgeist…Some Examples My brain is very slow today…. Let me process that…. Addicts have a mental health problem that needs to be diagnosed, treated and cured. 2

13. Zeitgeist…Where Does This all Lead? The Circle Game. 13

14. "Residential Schools were created out of the largess of the federal government and the missionary imperatives of the major churches as a means of bringing the advantages of Christian civilization to Aboriginal populations. With the benefit of late-20th century hindsight, some of the means with which this task was undertaken may be seen to have been unfortunate, but it is important to understand that this work was undertaken with the best of humanitarian intentions. Now, in any large organization, isolated incidents of abuse may occur, and such abuses may have occurred in some Indian Residential Schools. In any event, individuals who attended Residential Schools now appear to be suffering low self-esteem, alcoholism, somatic disorders, violent tendencies, and other symptoms of psychological distress (called “Residential School Syndrome”). While these symptoms seem endemic to Aboriginal Peoples in general (and not limited to those who attended Residential School), this is likely to have come about because successive generations of attendees passed along, as it were, their personal psychological problems to their home communities and, through factors such as inadequacy of parenting skills, perpetuated the symptomology, if not the syndrome. In order to heal the rift the Residential School experience may have created between Aboriginal Peoples and Canadian society at large, and in order to heal those individuals who still suffer the consequences of their school experiences, it is necessary and appropriate to establish formally the nature of Residential School Syndrome, causally link the condition to Residential School abuses (physical, sexual, or emotional), determine the extent of its influence in Aboriginal populations, and suggest appropriate individual and community interventions that will bring about psychological and social health." The Standard Account 13

15. "Residential Schools were one of many attempts at the genocide of the Aboriginal Peoples inhabiting the area now commonly called Canada. Initially, the goal of obliterating these peoples was connected with stealing what they owned (the land, the sky, the waters, and their lives, and all that these encompassed); and although this connection persists, present-day acts and policies of genocide are also connected with the hypocritical, legal, and self-delusional need on the part of the perpetrators to conceal what they did and what they continue to do. A variety of rationalizations (social, legal, religious, political, and economic) arose to engage (in one way or another) all segments of Euro Canadian society in the task of genocide. For example, some were told (and told themselves) that their actions arose out of a Missionary Imperative to bring the benefits of the One True Belief to savage pagans; others considered themselves justified in land theft by declaring that the Aboriginal Peoples were not putting the land to “proper” use; and so on. The creation of Indian Residential Schools followed a time-tested method of obliterating indigenous cultures, and the psychosocial consequences these schools would have on Aboriginal Peoples were well understood at the time of their formation. Present-day symptomology found in Aboriginal Peoples and societies does not constitute a distinct psychological condition, but is the well known and long-studied response of human beings living under conditions of severe and prolonged oppression. Although there is no doubt that individuals who attended Residential Schools suffered, and continue to suffer, from the effects of their experiences, the tactic of pathologizing these individuals, studying their condition, and offering “therapy” to them and their communities must be seen as another rhetorical maneuver designed to obscure (to the world at large, to Aboriginal Peoples, and to Canadians themselves) the moral and financial accountability of Euro-Canadian society in a continuing record of Crimes Against Humanity." The Competing View 13

16. Learning Objectives Number 1 Describe the effect of the prevailing view in science on the impact and acceptance of new ways of thinking. Use examples from the text and from class to support your answer. 2

17. Distinguishing Bad Science from Good Science The idea of falsifiability, was invented byKarl Popper in 1919 and was reformulated by him in the 1960s. This principle states that: In order to be scientific, a scientific statement ('fact', theory, 'law', principle, etc) must be falsifiable. 2

18. The criteria for Falsifiability 1) It is easy to confirm or verify nearly every theory — if we look for confirmations. 2) Confirmations are significant only if they are the result of risky predictions 3) "Good" scientific theories include prohibitions which forbid certain things to happen. The more a theory forbids, the better it is. 4)A theory which is not refutable by any conceivable event is non-scientific. Irrefutably is not a virtue of a theory. 5)Theories that take greater "risks" are more testable, more exposed to refutation. 6)Confirming or corroborating evidence is only significant when it is the result of a genuine test of the theory; "genuine" in this case means that it comes out of a serious but unsuccessful attempt to falsify the theory. 2

19. Richard Feynman at Caltech Caltech address https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzKd2NIYS1k&index=11&list=PLec4NMgGtVhrYtdA-l06i7FRetlinCW-4&t=0s 2

20. Loose Ends 1) What is the mind? 2) How does the mind interact with the brain? Positions Monism vs Dualism Materialism vs idealism Eliminativist materialism vs Reductive materialism The Mind/Body Problem 2

21. Loose Ends • 1) James Mill (1773-1836) • The mind is a machine • If the mind is a machine psychology can take a mechanistic position on how the mind functions • If the mind is a machine it follows that humans do not have free will. The mind is a passive machine that merely reacts to physical inputs. • If the mind is a machine, we can determine how it works by breaking it down in to its elementary components. It follows from this that we can take a reductionist position about how the mind works. We can argue that all mental phenomena such as thinking, feeling, etc., can be reduced to (are nothing more than) the working parts of the mental machine. • 2) John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) • The mind is active and therefore can not be merely a machine • The sense in which the mind is active and not passive is that the mind plays an active role in the association of ideas. • The mind combines mental elements to form complex ideas. These complex ideas are different than the elements that form them (H2O is different from hydrogen and oxygen) The Mill’s 2

22. BUT…LET US BE CLEAR James Mill did not discover in the normal sense that the mind is a machine. He did not look inside the brain or the head or the soul and find a mind where no one hand found one before. In a manner of speaking he did what Aristotle and all other metaphysicians since have done: WHAT WAS THAT? 2

23. Where Did These Ideas Come From? James Mill: The mind is a machine John Stuart Mill: Mental chemistry…the mind combines elements to form complex ideas Any Ideas? 2

24. Do We Do This Today? “Let’s be clear, though, that the use of the computer metaphor does not commit us to claiming that “the mind is just like a computer”….Instead, we are suggesting only that the mind is enough like a computer that we can profitably explain much about the mind in using the language of computer processing.” 2

25. Precursors To Modern Psychology: PsychoPhysics Ernst Weber (1795-1878): The two-point threshold Weber developed “Weber’s Law” that is a mathematical statement of something called the just noticeable difference. Weber’s Law is: JND= DR/R Where JND = just noticeable difference R= the physical intensity of the stimulus DR= the change in the intensity of the initial stimulus 19

26. Precursors To Modern Psychology: Psychophysics Gustav Fechner (1801-1887): The Weber-Fechner Law. Fechner re-phrased Weber’s initial finding as follows: • S=K*LOG*R Where • S=Perceived intensity of the stimulus • R=physical intensity of the stimulus • K=Constant 19

27. Precursors To Modern Psychology: Psychophysics This shows that quantification of a relationship between perception and reality was at least possible. 19

28. Next Week The beginnings of psychology Wundt Titchener James 19