The Scientific Method and its Practice in the Social Sciences : A Science of Politics?

1. The Scientific Method and its Practice in the Social Sciences:A Science of Politics? F-N & N (Chapter 1 – The Scientific Approach) K,K & V (Chapter 1 – The Science in Social Science) Gerring (Chapters 1-2) Gordon, Scott. 1991. The History and Philosophy of Social Science. Routledge, Ch. 18, The foundations of science, pp.589-668. Available online at: http://www.compilerpress.atfreeweb.com/Anno%20Scott%20Ch.%2018%20Fdn%20of%20Science.htm (read section B especially closely) Stephen Thornton. 1997. “Karl Popper.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://www.ul.ie/~philos/vol1/popper.html Alexander Bird. 2004. “Thomas Kuhn.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/thomas-kuhn/

2. What is science and the scientific method?

3. What is science and the scientific method? • Science is a way/method of obtaining knowledge. It is defined by its method. Therefore, it is useful to distinguish science from other ways of obtaining knowledge.

4. 3 Approaches to Obtaining Knowledge • Authoritarian Mode • Mystical Mode • Rational Mode • Science, as a methodology, was developed as a way to overcome the flaws of these alternative methods.

5. The Scientific Method – Shared Features/Goals as Practiced Today F-NN + KKV 1. The goal is explanation / inference

6. The Scientific Method – Shared Features/Goals as Practiced Today (F-NN) + KKV) 1. The goal is explanation / inference 2. Scientific explanation (and therefore method) must ultimately rely on objective, systematic,empirical observation

7. The Scientific Method – Shared Features/Goals as Practiced Today (F-NN) + KKV) 1. The goal is explanation / inference 2. Scientific explanation (and therefore method) must ultimately rely on objective, systematic,empirical observation 3. Openness of method / practice – helps insure objectivity • Intersubjectivity • Replication

8. The Scientific Method – Shared Features/Goals as Practiced Today (F-NN) + KKV) 1. The goal is explanation / inference 2. Scientific explanation (and therefore method) must ultimately rely on objective, systematic,empirical observation 3. Openness of method / practice – helps insure objectivity • Intersubjectivity • Replication 4. The conclusions are uncertain.

10. The Evolution of the Scientific Method • Vienna Circle (ca. 1929) – (Called themselves positivists)

11. The Evolution of the Scientific Method • Vienna Circle (ca. 1929) – (Called themselves positivists) • “ultra-empiricist” • Rejected causality • Founder: Moritz Schlick

12. The Evolution of the Scientific Method • Carl Hempel (logical empiricism) and the ‘covering law’ model of science

13. The Evolution of the Scientific Method • Carl Hempel (logical empiricism) and the ‘covering law’ model of science • the central task of human inquiry is to explain phenomena • non-observable entities – and especially causal connections - play an essential role in explanation

14. The Evolution of the Scientific Method • Deductive-Nomological Explanation (Carl Hempel) • Consists of • (1) a series of universal laws (L) (assumed to be true) • (2) a set of causal antecedents (A) – specific conditions – that as a result of laws in (L) directly results in • (3) event/phenomenon to be explained (E=explanandum) • E always happens if L and C are correctly specified (deterministic) • Important criticism – • the “problem of induction” – (universal laws?)

15. The Evolution of the Scientific Method • Hempel adds a second type of scientific explanation • Deductive-Nomological Explanation • (see earlier slide) • Probabilistic Explanation • “Universal laws” do not operate with certainty (but with some probability) • the occurrence of E is only expected with some likelihood (it is not certain to occur)

16. The Evolution of the Scientific Method • Karl Popper

17. The Evolution of the Scientific Method • Karl Popper • Scientific knowledge acquired by means of successive Conjectures and Refutations (the title of one of his books) • Theories are tentative ‘conjectures’ (as opposed to universal laws that are by definition assumed to be true) • They cannot be verified by empirical evidence, but they can be refuted. • We build up our knowledge of the world by ascertaining what is not true (falsification)

18. The Evolution of the Scientific Method • Karl Popper • But can empirical evidence really falsify a theory with certainty? • The ‘Duhem-Quine’ thesis • Popper modifies position - theory cannot be rejected unless another theory is available that is better

19. Additional Perspectives on the Scientific Method • Milton Freidman – Predictive Instrumentalism

20. Additional Perspectives on the Scientific Method • Milton Freidman – Predictive Instrumentalism • “The Methodology of Positive Economics” (1953 essay) • Science as a “mysterious black box” of propositions • Successful prediction is the only criterion by which scientific theories should be judged

21. Prescriptive vs. Descriptive Perspectives on Scientific Progress • Thomas Kuhn – The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962) • “During the past twenty years or so no theory of the nature of science has received more attention than Kuhn’s, by natural and social scientists as well as by professional historians and philosophers of science.” (Gordon)

22. Prescriptive vs. Descriptive Perspectives on Scientific Progress • Thomas Kuhn – The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962) • Normal science vs. revolutionary science

23. Prescriptive vs. Descriptive Perspectives on Scientific Progress • Thomas Kuhn – The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962) • Normal science vs. revolutionary science • “For (Kuhn), there is no logic of discovery but rather a process motivated by group struggle within a scientific community.” (FNN, 17) • To Popper, the scientific community ought to be (and mostly is) an “open society” in which no dominant paradigm is ever sacred. (FNN, 17)

24. Prescriptive vs. Descriptive Perspectives on Scientific Progress • Imre Lakatos – (Methodology of Scientific Research Programs - MSRP) • Every scientific research program consists of a “hard core” and a “protective belt” of assumptions, conditions, hypotheses • Science progresses by means of “sophisticated falsification”, which focuses on the comparative evaluation of whole research programs

25. Assignment 2 • (Due September 9): In approximately 1-2 single-spaced pages, answer the following two questions. 1. Briefly summarize the basic features of the scientific method discussed in your readings. What are some of the challenges facing social scientists in applying the scientific method to social/human/political behavior? 2. What is “scientific progress” according to Thomas Kuhn and how and why/how does it occur? How do Kuhn’s thoughts on scientific progress differ with those of Popper?

26. Objections to Science • Objections focus on the process of objective empirical observation - critics claim that objective empirical observation is not possible (why?)

27. Objections to Science • Objections focus on the process of objective empirical observation - critics claim that objective empirical observation is not possible (why?) • observations are inherently tainted/distorted because they need to be interpreted by human beings • observations are filtered by values, culture, personal interests (Kuhn) • the extremists on this point call for abandoning science, or at least call for a recognition of science as something other than what it claims to be (almost equivalent to what Nachmias refers to as the authoritarian mode)

28. A Modern Compromise? • Cognitive Instrumentalism –theories and empirical data function as complementary implements of investigation, and the only rules that must be followed are that (Gordon): • theories should be coherent, logically sound and articulate • Rely on observation data that are objectively obtained and properly processed.

29. Challenges to the Practice of Science in the Social Sciences • Inherent Uniqueness of Social Science? • Vienna Circle, Hempel, adhered to “unity of science” thesis. • Others have since questioned the possibility that the same (general) methods can be applied to both natural and human phenomena

30. Challenges to the Practice of Science in the Social Sciences • How are the social sciences different (according to critics)?

31. Challenges to the Practice of Science in the Social Sciences • How are the social sciences different (according to critics)? • social phenomena are not as uniform, or as constant overtime, as natural phenomena (lack of generalizable laws) • social scientists are less able to isolate particular causal factors from their general context than natural scientists (multiple causes; lack of “control”) • Greater causal complexity (conditional relationships) • “Mental entities” – legitimate objects of scientific study? • Objective observation more problematic in social sciences due to objects of study and potential implications of findings - unavoidable entanglement between the values held by scientists and their research procedures.

32. Challenges to the Practice of Science in the Social Sciences • Why might values affect social research more than natural science?

33. Challenges to the Practice of Science in the Social Sciences • How (specifically) might values affect social research (according to critics)? • Choosing research questions • Empirical classification (conceptualization/measurement) • Conducting analysis

34. Challenges to the Practice of Science in the Social Sciences • What to do about it? • Weber’s concept of Verstehen (also known as interpretive sociology) • In a widely discussed book (The Idea of a Social Science, and its Relation to Philosophy, 1958), Peter Winch argues that the study of social phenomena must be ‘philosophical’ rather than ‘scientific’, by which he means that the proper way to comprehend such phenomena is by conceptual analysis rather than by means of empirical research. • Combating contamination due to values?

35. Scientific Method and Type of Method • Quantitative vs. Qualitative Methods – is one approach inherently more “scientific” than the other?

36. Scientific Method and Type of Method • Quantitative vs. Qualitative Methods – is one approach inherently more “scientific” than the other? • KKV argue that “the same underlying logic provides the framework for both” • Gerring makes a similar argument • RF: Two reasons why people do qualitative research in political science • It is preferable because it does a better job of doing scientific research (scientific qualitative research) • It is preferable because scientific research is inherently flawed (non-scientific qualitative research)

37. The Research Process (Scientific Method in Social Research) • Research Question • Theory and Hypotheses • Research Design • Operationalization (measurement) • Empirical Observation and Analysis

38. The Research Process (Scientific Method in Social Research) • Research Question • Theory and Hypotheses • Research Design • Operationalization (measurement) • Empirical Observation and Analysis • Gerring (Concepts, Propositions, Research Design)

39. Choosing a Research Question (due Thursday, September 23rd) • Choose a question that can be studied scientifically • Avoid “should” questions (normative), historical questions • Choose questions that require a theory (as a tentative answer) • Choose questions that can be answered empirically (large-N works better for this class)