Philosophy of Science and Ethics

Addis Ababa University, Philosophy Department

Lecture Note
Habiba Nuredine
 WHAT IS PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
epistemic and semantic aspects of science. ethical
PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE issues such as bioethics and scientific misconducts
Is a branch of philosophy concerned with the are often considered ethics or science studies rather
foundations, methods , and implications of science. than the philosophy of science.
The central questions of this study concern:
 what qualifies as science
 The reliability of scientific theories, and
 What is the ultimate purpose of science.
This discipline overlaps with metaphysics, ontology,
and epistemology, for example, when it explores the
relationship between science and truth.
Philosophy of science focuses on metaphysical,
PURPOSE:
The purpose of the philosophy of science is to critically examine and analyze the assumptions, principles, and
concepts that underlie scientific practice.
It seeks to provide a deeper understanding of the nature of science and its role in society.
The philosophy of science also aims to clarify the goals and limitations of scientific inquiry, as well as the ethical
and social implications of scientific knowledge and its applications.
 CONCEPTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE:
 Epistemology, Empiricism ,
 Induction , Deduction
 Demarcation problem,
 Falsification , Paradigm shifts and
 Scientific Revolutions
 WHO’S WHO IN THE PHILOSOPHY OF
SCIENCE
Aristotle (384-322 bc) Karl Popper (1924-1994)
Avicenna (ibn sina) Thomas Kuhn (1922-1996)
Alhazen (ibn al-haytham) Paul Feyerabend (1924-1994)
Roger bacon
Francis bacon (1561-1626)
Rene Descartes (1596-1650)
Piere Duhem (1861-1916)
Carl hempel (1905-1997)
 MAJOR TURNING POINTS IN THE HISTORY OF
SCIENCE (PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE)

• logical positivism: it emphasized the importance of empirical verification and rejected

metaphysical or unobservable claims.
• Thomas Kuhn's paradigm shifts: Kuhn argued that scientific progress is not always a smooth,
linear process, but rather punctuated by periods of revolutionary change, where existing scientific
paradigms are replaced by new ones.
• Falsifications: Karl popper developed the philosophy of falsificationism, which suggests that the
scientific method should focus on attempting to falsify, rather than confirm, hypotheses.
according to popper, scientific theories should be testable and subject to potential refutation.
• Social constructivism: social constructivism challenges the idea that scientific knowledge is an
objective representation of an external reality. Instead, it emphasizes the role of social and cultural
factors in shaping scientific knowledge and argues that scientific theories are socially constructed.
Chapter One

INDUCTION AND
INDUCTIVISM
Chapter One: Induction and Inductivism

WHAT IS INDUCTION? particular phenomena can lead to the

 INDUCTION is a method of reasoning that formulation of general principles or laws.
involves moving from specific observations to
general conclusions (it is the process of generalizing
from specific observations or instances to form a
general principle or theory).
 It is used to develop scientific theories and make
predictions about the natural world.
 According to inductivism, scientific knowledge is
derived from a process of induction, which involves
gathering empirical evidence and making
generalizations or theories based on observations.
 The idea is that repeated observations of
Inductive Reasoning in Science:
1. Inductive reasoning plays a central role in ** the ground when released, forming the basis
scientific inquiry by allowing scientists to make for the theory of gravity.
predictions, form hypotheses, and develop theories.
2. Scientists often use inductive reasoning to infer
general laws or principles based on observed
patterns in experimental or observational data.
Example of inductive reasoning:
 1. Suppose a scientist observes several instances
of objects falling to the ground when released.
 2. Based on these observations, the scientist may
induce the general principle that all objects fall to
 THE PROBLEM OF INDUCTION:
Hume's problem of Induction,
Who is David Hume?
David Hume, an influential philosopher of the 18th
century, highlighted the problem of induction.
Hume argued that induction is not logically justified
and that there is no rational basis for assuming that
the future will resemble the past.
Hume's problem of Induction,
 The problem of induction is a philosophical issue
that questions the validity of inductive reasoning.
 The problem of induction questions our reasons
for believing that the future will resemble the past,
or more broadly it questions predictions about
unobserved things based on previous
observations.
 The inference from the observed to unobserved
one is known as inductive inferences.
 The Basic concepts of Hume Reasoning
 For example, the idea of a fire/flame is derived from
A. Impressions and Ideas the impression or experience of touching the candle
 According to David Hume, all our thoughts and flame.
knowledge can be traced back to either
"impressions" or "ideas."
 Impressions refer to direct and vivid sensations we
experience through our senses. They are the raw and
immediate perceptions we have of the world.
 Ideas, on the other hand, are less vivid copies of
impressions. They are derived from and represent
our memories or mental reconstructions of past
impressions.
 B. Causation
 Hume argued that our understanding of causation is  Example:
not derived from reason but rather from custom and When we strike a match, it produces a flame.
habit.
 According to Hume, when we observe the striking of
 Hume observed that inductive reasoning often
a match followed by the appearance of a flame, we
involves making claims about cause and effect
tend to infer a causal relationship between the two
relationships. We observe a sequence of events and events. We form a belief that the striking of the match
then infer a causal connection between them. causes the flame. However, Hume argues that this
However, Hume argued that we cannot perceive
belief in causation is not rationally justified.
causation directly; instead, we only observe constant
conjunctions of events.
 C. Uniformity of Nature

 Hume's principle of the uniformity of nature is the idea For example

that the future will resemble the past in terms of the
If we have observed the sun rising every morning
patterns and regularities we observe in the natural throughout our lives, we assume that it will continue to
world. rise in the future. This assumption is based on the
 Hume argued that our expectations about the future are principle of the uniformity of nature.
based on our past experiences.
 Hume questioned our justification for assuming that the
future will resemble the past. This assumption is
essential for induction because we rely on past
observations to make predictions about the future.
 Hume argued that we have no rational grounds to assert
that nature will remain uniform in the future based
solely on past experiences.
 D. Hume on The Problem of Induction
The problem of induction, as discussed by Hume, is the you have not encountered. Hume's problem of
challenge of justifying our reliance on induction as a induction highlights the uncertainty and lack of
method of reasoning. logical justification for making such generalizations
 Hume argued that induction is not rationally justified based on limited observations.
but rather grounded in custom and habit. He
claimed that our belief in the reliability of induction
is not based on reason or evidence.
 For example, let's say you have always seen swans
that are white. Based on this observation, you form
the induction that "all swans are white." however,
this conclusion is based on limited observations and
does not guarantee that all swans are indeed white. It
is possible that there are swans of other colors that
 Conclusion
 Skepticism about induction: as a result of his because it has worked in the past, and we have
analysis, Hume concluded that we can never have learned to rely on it. Another solution is to argue
certain knowledge about the future based on that inductive reasoning is justified by its success in
induction. our beliefs about the future are always predicting future events.
uncertain and subject to revision. • This view suggests that inductive reasoning is not
 Hume's skepticism about induction challenges the logically justified, but rather pragmatically
traditional view that induction is a reliable method justified.
of reasoning.
• There are several proposed solutions to the
problem of induction. One solution is to argue that
inductive reasoning is not a matter of logic, but
rather a matter of psychology.
• This view suggests that we use inductive reasoning
Chapter Two:
Falsification
 Chapter Two: Falsification
What is Falsification? Popper proposed falsifiability as a solution to the
problem of induction and the problem of demarcation
Who is Karl Popper?
Karl Popper (1902-1994) was an influential philosopher1. He argued that a theory or hypothesis that is not
of science. He was born an Austrian –British Philosopher. falsifiable is not scientific, but rather a matter of
Popper made significant contributions to the philosophy metaphysics or pseudoscience.
of science, epistemology, and the philosophy of social
and political sciences.
 Falsifiability is a concept in the philosophy of science
that refers to the ability of a theory or hypothesis to be
tested and potentially proven false. It was introduced by
Karl Popper in his book “The Logic of Scientific
Discovery” in 1934
A theory or hypothesis is falsifiable if it can be
logically contradicted by an empirical test.
The Basic Concepts of Falsification
way to demonstrate its falsehood through
A. Falsification
empirical evidence.
 Falsifiability is a deductive standard of evaluation of
scientific theories and hypotheses.
 Falsifiability has been used as a key notion in the
separation of science from non-science and
pseudoscience.

Example:
 Suppose we have a hypothesis that "all swans
are white." This hypothesis suggests that every
single swan in existence is white in color. To
assess the falsifiability of this hypothesis, we
need to consider whether there is a conceivable
Cont'd

Explanation correct.

In this case, the falsifiability of the hypothesis lies inHe argued that science would best progress using
the possibility of observing a single non-white swans. deductive reasoning as its primary emphasis, known
if we were to encounter a swan that is not white, such as critical rationalism.
as a black or gray swan, it would directly contradict
the hypothesis. The observation of a non-white swan
would falsify the claim that "all swans are white.“
 All inductive evidence is limited: we do not
observe the universe at all times and in all places.
We are not justified, therefore, in making a general
rule from this observation of particulars.
 According to Popper, scientific theory should make
predictions that can be tested, and the theory should
be rejected if these predictions are shown not to be
 B. Un-falsifiable and Falsifiable Hypothesis

Un-Falsifiable Hypothesis evidence to either support or refute the hypothesis. If

we find a single Africans that is not black, such as a
 Suppose someone claims that an invisible, intangible,
white African, it would falsify the hypothesis and
and undetectable Aliens exists in their garage.
demonstrate that not all Africans are black. The
 This claim is unfalsifiable because it cannot be tested or hypothesis is testable and can potentially be proven
potentially refuted through empirical observation or false based on empirical evidence.
experimentation. Since there is no conceivable way to
 Conclusion: an invisible aliens are unscientific. On
demonstrate the non-existence of such a Aliens, the
the other hand, the hypothesis that ‘All Africans are
claim falls outside the realm of scientific inquiry.
black’ is said to be scientific.
Falsifiable Hypothesis
 Let's consider the hypothesis that "All Africans are
black." This hypothesis is falsifiable because it can be
subjected to empirical testing.
 By searching for and observing Africans, we can gather
 C. Conjectures and Refutations

Conjectures: are tentative explanations or solutions meaning it involves repetition and continuous
that scientists propose in the form of hypotheses. these refinement. It is an ongoing cycle where hypotheses are
hypotheses are based on existing knowledge, continuously tested, evaluated, and potentially refuted.
observations, and theories.  The process does not end with the refutation of a
Refutation: The purpose is to actively seek evidence hypothesis but rather leads to the formulation of new
conjectures based on the insights gained from previous
that could potentially disprove or refute the hypothesis.
testing and refutation. This iterative nature allows
Refutations can occur through experimental
scientific knowledge to evolve and progress over time.
observations, empirical data, logical inconsistencies, or
failed predictions. If a hypothesis is convincingly
refuted, it is rejected or modified.

Iterative Process:
 The process of conjectures and refutations is iterative,
CONT'D

Example: However, initial attempts to locate the planet based on

these predictions failed.
Astronomers observed irregularities in the orbit of
Uranus that could not be explained by the known Iterative Process: Rather than abandoning the
gravitational forces. These deviations suggested the hypothesis, astronomers revisited their calculations,
presence of an unknown celestial body exerting refined their methods, and made improvements in their
gravitational influence on Uranus. observations. They realized that the discrepancies in
Uranus's orbit could be better explained by the
 Conjecture: Based on these observations, astronomers
gravitational influence of another planet.
proposed a conjecture or hypothesis that there might be
an undiscovered planet beyond Uranus causing the
observed irregularities in its orbit.
 Refutation: The search for the hypothetical planet
began, with astronomers using mathematical
calculations and predictions based on Newtonian
physics to estimate the location of the unknown planet.
Refinement and Confirmation: with revised the hypothesis. It highlights the importance of
calculations, astronomers predicted a new location for actively seeking evidence that either supports or
the unknown planet. based on these predictions, the refutes a hypothesis, and how the process of
German astronomer Johann Galle, in 1846, observed a refinement and testing leads to the growth of
celestial body in the predicted location. the planet was scientific knowledge.
named Neptune, and its discovery confirmed the
hypothesis of an unknown planet beyond Uranus.

Conclusion:
 This example demonstrates how the process of
conjectures and refutations drives scientific
progress. The initial hypothesis was subjected to
empirical testing, and even though it faced initial
refutation, the iterative process of refinement and
improvement led to the successful confirmation of
 C. Demarcation Criterion
Demarcation criterion refers to his proposed
criterion for distinguishing between scientific and
non-scientific theories or claims.
According to Popper, a theory or claim can be
considered scientific if it meets the criterion of
falsifiability, whereas theories that are immune to
falsification fall outside the realm of science.
Demarcation Criterion
 Falsifiability * Empirical Content
 Testability
D. Falsification and Progress In Science

 Popper argued that scientific progress occurs

Criticisms of Falsification
when theories are progressively refined, modified,
or replaced in response to falsification. * Confirmation Bias

 The process of falsification ensures that scientific * The Duhem-Quine Thesis

knowledge becomes more robust and reliable over * The Problem of Underdetermination
time.
* Theoretical Underdetermination
 Through the iterative process of conjectures,
* Pseudoscience and Non-Falsifiability
refutations, and the rejection of false theories,
scientific understanding advances, and new
knowledge is generated.
 Conclusion
Karl Popper's theory of falsification challenged the traditional notions of
scientific inquiry and offered a new perspective on the nature of scientific
knowledge.

By emphasizing the importance of subjecting theories to rigorous attempts at

falsification, popper provided a criterion for distinguishing between scientific
and non-scientific theories.

Falsifiability has been used as a key notion in the separation of science from
non-science and pseudoscience.
Chapter Three
Scientific Revolution
 CHAPTER THREE: Scientific Revolution

Scientific Revolution paradigm shifts, where existing scientific theories,

methodologies, and assumptions are replaced by new
Thomas Kuhn (1922-1996)
ones.
 Was an American philosopher of science. He is best
 He introduced the concept of paradigms, which are
known for his influential work "The Structure of
overarching frameworks that guide scientific research
Scientific Revolutions," published in 1962. Kuhn's
within a particular scientific community.
ideas had a significant impact on the philosophy of
science and the understanding of how scientific
knowledge progresses.
 "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" marked a
departure from the traditional view of scientific
progress as a linear and cumulative accumulation of
knowledge.
 Kuhn argued that scientific progress occurs through
The Basic Concepts of Kuhn's Scientific Revolution

A. Paradigms
 Paradigm refers to a set of shared beliefs, theories, methods, and assumptions that guide scientific
research within a particular scientific community during a specific time period.
 A paradigm represents the dominant scientific framework within a specific scientific community
during a given time. It includes the accepted theories, concepts, methods, and assumptions that
guide scientific inquiry.

Example: Newtonian physics

During the 17th and 18th centuries, Newtonian physics represented a paradigm in the field
of physics. It provided a comprehensive framework for understanding the laws of motion
and gravity and was widely accepted by the scientific community of that time.
B. Normal Science
 Normal science refers to the period in scientific that period conducted normal science by using this
inquiry when researchers work within an established framework to predict the positions and movements
paradigm. During this phase, scientists engage in of celestial objects, often refining and improving the
routine puzzle-solving activities within the mathematical models and observations within the
framework provided by the paradigm. geocentric paradigm.
 Normal science is characterized by the application
of established theories, methodologies, and
assumptions to address specific research questions
or anomalies within the paradigm.
Example: Astronomy
 In the geocentric model : the Earth was the center of
the universe, and celestial bodies, including the sun
and planets, revolved around it. Astronomers during
 C. Anomalies and Crisis
 Anomalies are observations or experimental results geocentric model, which placed the earth at the
that cannot be adequately explained or accounted for
center of the universe. However, observations of
within the existing paradigm. These anomalies
challenge the prevailing scientific theories and the movements of celestial bodies, such as the
assumptions and create a sense of discrepancy or retrograde motion of planets, could not be adequately
tension within the scientific community. explained within the geocentric framework. These
 When anomalies accumulate and persist, they can anomalies challenged the prevailing theories and
lead to a crisis in the scientific community, where
assumptions, creating a crisis in the field of
confidence in the current paradigm is shaken. Crisis
Leads to scientific revolution. astronomy.

Example
• The prevailing paradigm at the time was the
 D. Scientific Revolution

 Scientific revolution is a fundamental shift in the

way that scientists view the world. It occurs when
the existing paradigm is no longer able to explain
new observations or discoveries.
 Kuhn calls these revolutions "paradigm shifts," and
he suggests that they are driven by a combination of
scientific data and social factors.
 Scientific revolutions occur when the existing
paradigm, which encompasses the accepted theories,
methodologies, and assumptions, is no longer able to
account for or explain new or accumulated
anomalies and challenges.
 Scientific Revolution on the Moon.
 Paradigm Shifts
 Paradigm shift: paradigm shifts occur when A paradigm shift refers to a fundamental change in
anomalies, inconsistencies, or new discoveries the underlying assumptions, theories, and
accumulate to a point where the existing paradigm methodologies that shape scientific inquiry within a
can no longer explain or predict certain phenomena. particular scientific community.
This leads to a crisis within the scientific It represents a radical departure from the prevailing
community, and a new paradigm emerges to replace paradigm and opens up new possibilities for
the old one.
scientific exploration and understanding.
 Thomas Kuhn's concept of "paradigm shifts" refers
• Paradigms are not directly comparable or
to the idea that scientific progress is not a linear
commensurable
process, but rather a series of revolutions that occur
when the existing paradigm is no longer able to
explain new observations or discoveries.

Paradigm Shifts
 E. Incommensurability
 Incommensurability is the idea that theories * Shift in Worldview
originating from different paradigms are Example: The incommensurability between the
fundamentally different and cannot be compared using geocentric and heliocentric paradigms.
a common measure.
 This means that there is no objective way to determine
which theory is better or more accurate, as the criteria
for evaluation are different for each paradigm.
 Incommensurability refers to the idea that paradigms
are not directly comparable or commensurable
 The implications of Incommensurability
* Conceptual Differences
* Methodological Differences
 Criticism
 Some philosophers have argued that Kuhn's view of scientists propose hypotheses and then attempt to
scientific revolutions is too extreme, and that there are falsify them through empirical testing.
some commonalities between different paradigms that
allow for comparison.
 Others have suggested that Kuhn's notion of
incommensurability is too extreme, and that there are
ways to compare theories across different paradigms.
 Karl popper, a philosopher of science, was one of
Kuhn's most vocal critics. popper argued that Kuhn's
view of scientific progress was too relativistic, and that
it failed to account for the role of critical testing in
scientific inquiry.
 Popper suggested that scientific progress is driven by
the process of conjecture and refutation, in which
 Chapter Four

Methodic Anarchism
 Chapter Four: Methodic Anarchism

Paul Feyerabend
 Paul Feyerabend was an Austrian philosopher of
science. He is best known for his work in the
philosophy of science, particularly his book “Against
Method” (1975).
 He argued that there are no universally valid
methodological rules for scientific inquiry.
 He questioned the idea of a universal scientific
method and advocated for a more flexible and
pluralistic approach to scientific inquiry.

Methodic Anarchism
 The Basic Concepts of Methodic Anarchism

A. Methodic Anarchism phenomena. During the early 20th century, scientists

such as Niels Bohr, Albert Einstein, and Erwin
 Is the idea that there is no fixed or universal scientific
Schrödinger proposed different interpretations of
method and that scientists should have the freedom to
quantum theory, each with its own set of
employ various methods and approaches in their
methodologies and assumptions.
research.
 The use of the term anarchism in the name reflected
the methodological pluralism prescription of the
theory, as the purported scientific method does not
have a monopoly on truth or useful results.
Example
 Methodic Anarchism can be seen in the history of the
development of quantum mechanics, particularly the
debates surrounding the interpretation of quantum
 B. Pluralism and Methodological Freedom
 Pluralism and methodological freedom are approaches offers distinct theories, methodologies,
philosophical concepts that advocate for the and perspectives on human behavior and mental
acceptance and utilization of diverse approaches, processes.
methodologies, and perspectives in scientific inquiry.
1. Pluralism
Pluralism in science acknowledges that there can be
multiple valid ways to approach and understand a
particular subject or phenomenon.
Example (In the field of psychology)
 Within psychology, there are various theoretical
orientations and approaches, including behaviorism,
cognitive psychology, psychodynamic psychology,
humanistic psychology, and more. Each of these
 2. Methodological Freedom
2. Methodological Freedom and analyze the complex interactions between
pollutants and ecosystems.
 Methodological freedom refers to the freedom of
researchers to choose and employ different methods, In both of these examples, pluralism and
techniques, and approaches in their scientific methodological freedom facilitate intellectual diversity,
investigations. encourage interdisciplinary collaboration, and promote
innovation in scientific inquiry.
Example (In the field of environmental science)
 Feyerabend also believed in **epistemological
 In the field of environmental science, researchers pluralism**,
studying the impact of pollution on ecosystems may
 Epistemological pluralism, which is the idea that
employ a variety of methods depending on their
there are many ways of knowing and that no one way
research goals.
is superior to the others. He argued that the scientific
 They may use field observations, laboratory method is just one way of knowing and that other ways
experiments, mathematical modeling, remote sensing, of knowing, such as intuition, imagination, and
or a combination of these approaches to gather data creativity, are just as important.
 C. Paradigm Diversity
 Paradigm diversity refers to the coexistence of the diversity of approaches and theories that scientists
multiple scientific paradigms or frameworks within a employ to understand the nature of the universe.
particular field or discipline.
 It recognizes that different theories, methodologies,
and conceptual frameworks can be used to interpret
and explain phenomena, allowing for a richer and more
comprehensive understanding of the subject matter.

Example ( In the filed of cosmology)

 There are multiple competing paradigms or theories
that attempt to explain the fundamental properties and
dynamics of the cosmos. Some of these paradigms
include: Big Bang Theory, Inflationary Theory, and
Steady State Theory.
 These different paradigms within cosmology illustrate
 D. Critique Of Scientific Authority
 Feyerabend questioned the notion that science acupuncture, or energy healing techniques have been
should have a privileged status and be the sole considered unscientific or labeled as pseudoscience
arbiter of truth. He argued that granting excessive by scientific authorities.
authority to science can lead to the suppression of
Feyerabend would argue that this dismissal of
alternative perspectives and hinder intellectual
alternative healing practices based on scientific
progress.
authority limits the exploration of potential
Example therapeutic approaches.

 In many societies, mainstream science has often

dismissed or marginalized alternative healing He believed that the rigid adherence to a single
practices that do not conform to conventional scientific method excludes valuable knowledge and
scientific methods and theories. hinders the progress of understanding and improving
 Practices such as traditional herbal medicine, healthcare.
 E. Historical Case Studies
 According to Feyerabend, **historical case placed Earth at the center. Copernicus's theory
studies** are a way of demonstrating that there is no contradicted established religious and scientific
single scientific method that has a monopoly on truth beliefs of the time.
or useful results.  Feyerabend used the Copernican revolution to
 He believed that the idea of the operation of science argue against the idea of a universal scientific
by fixed, universal rules is unrealistic, pernicious, method.
and detrimental to science itself. instead, he argued Copernicus's theory
that scientific progress requires several competing
alternatives within one domain of inquiry.
Example: (Copernican Revolution)
 During the 16th century, Nicolaus Copernicus
proposed a heliocentric model of the solar system,
challenging the prevailing geocentric model that
 F. Epistemological Anarchism
 Epistemological anarchism is a philosophical the idea that there is a single "correct" way to
position that challenges the idea of a universal or understand reality.
fixed method for acquiring knowledge and For instance, in the case of paradigm shifts
understanding the world.
discussed by Thomas Kuhn, such as the transition
 It questions the notion that there is a single, from Newtonian physics to Einstein's theory of
authoritative way to gain knowledge and argues for relativity, epistemological anarchism would question
a more pluralistic and open-minded approach to the idea that there is a single, universally applicable
epistemology. method for evaluating and accepting scientific
 Epistemological anarchism suggests that different theories.
methods and approaches to knowledge acquisition Instead, it would encourage a more open-minded
can be equally valid and fruitful, depending on the exploration of different theoretical frameworks and
context and subject matter. methodologies, allowing for the possibility that
 It emphasizes the importance of diversity, flexibility, multiple perspectives can contribute to our
understanding of the natural world.
and openness in the pursuit of knowledge, rejecting
 Criticism

One of the main criticisms is that it is too Critics argue that Feyerabend's approach is
radical and that it undermines the very idea too vague and that it does not provide a
of science as a rational and objective clear framework for scientific inquiry.
enterprise.  Some critics argue that Feyerabend's
Critics argue that Feyerabend's rejection of methodological anarchism is not consistent
any fixed rules or methods for scientific with the history of science. They point out
inquiry leads to a kind of relativism that that many of the most important scientific
makes it impossible to distinguish between discoveries were made using the scientific
good and bad science. method and that Feyerabend's rejection of
Methodological anarchism is that it is not a this method is unwarranted.
viable alternative to the scientific method.
 Chapter Five
Scientific Realism and Anti-
Realism
Chapter Five: Scientific Realism and Anti-Realism
 Scientific realism is a philosophical position that phenomena is evidence of their truth.
asserts the existence of an external reality that is
independent of human observation and holds that
scientific theories aim to provide accurate
descriptions or explanations of that reality.
 Scientific realism is a philosophical position that
asserts that the universe described by science is real,
regardless of how it may be interpreted.
 Scientific realists believe that scientific theories aim
to give a true account of the world, and that the
entities they postulate actually exist. Thus, they argue
that scientific theories are approximately true, and
that their success in predicting and explaining
 The Basic Concepts of Scientific Realism

A. Ontological Commitment  Dark Matter

 Ontological Commitment: Refers to the belief that Neutrinos

scientific theories commit us to the existence of These examples illustrate how scientific theories
certain entities or structures in the world. often go beyond direct observation and make claims
 It asserts that when scientists formulate theories that about the existence of unobservable entities.
postulate the existence of unobservable entities, they
are making ontological claims about the existence of
those entities.
Examples
 Atoms
 Electrons
 Genes
 B. Theory-World Correspondence
 Theory-world correspondence is a central concept in light around massive objects, the expansion of the
scientific realism that refers to the idea that scientific universe, and the behavior of black holes.
theories aim to accurately represent the structure and
Theory of Evolution: Proposed by Charles Darwin,
entities of the world. explains the diversity of life on Earth through the
 According to scientific realists, successful theories process of natural selection. This theory corresponds to
correspond to the way the world is, even if our the way species have evolved over time and how they
understanding may be incomplete or approximate. are adapted to their environments. It provides a
framework for understanding the interconnectedness of
Examples:
different organisms and their shared ancestry.
 General Theory of Relativity: Albert Einstein's theory

of general relativity describes the nature of gravity as
the curvature of space-time caused by mass and energy.
This theory corresponds to the way the world works on
a large scale, providing accurate predictions and
explanations for phenomena such as the bending of
 C. Independence Of Observations
 Realists contend that scientific observations are
theory-laden, meaning they are influenced by the
conceptual frameworks and theoretical assumptions
employed to interpret them.
 Theories go beyond empirical data to provide
explanations and predictions about the unobservable
aspects of reality.
Examples
 Electromagnetic Fields
 Evolutionary Theory
 In both examples, scientific theories extend beyond
direct observations, allowing us to understand and
explain phenomena that are not directly accessible to
our senses.
 D. Long-Term Success Of Science
 Scientific realists point to the history of science as Germ Theory of Disease
evidence for their position.  It posits that microorganisms, such as bacteria and
 They argue that the cumulative success of scientific viruses, are responsible for causing various illnesses.
theories in making accurate predictions, technological The germ theory has led to significant advancements in
advancements, and providing explanatory power medicine, including the development of vaccines and
supports the claim that scientific theories are reliable the implementation of proper sanitation practices,
tools for understanding the world. greatly reducing the spread of infectious diseases.
Examples:
 Newtonian Mechanics
 Newtonian mechanics successfully explained and
predicted the motions of planets, projectiles, and
everyday objects under normal conditions. It was
widely accepted and applied for centuries until later
refinements and developments in physics.
 E. Aim for Truth

 Realists emphasize that the ultimate goal of

scientific inquiry is to uncover the truth about the
world. they believe that scientific theories should
be evaluated based on their truth or approximate
truth, and that theories that provide a more
accurate representation of reality are preferable.
 The pursuit of truth is seen as a fundamental
motivation in scientific realism, driving scientists
to uncover accurate explanations and expand our
knowledge of the universe.
 II. Scientific Anti-Realism

 Scientific anti-realism is a philosophical scientists to explain and predict phenomena,

position that challenges the realist view that rather than being accurate representations of the
scientific theories provide an accurate world.
representation of an independently existing
reality.
 Anti-realists claim that science does not aim to
uncover metaphysical truth about nature, but
rather to provide useful tools for describing and
predicting our experience.
 Anti-realists argue that scientific theories are
merely useful fictions that are constructed by
 The Basic Concepts of Scientific Anti-
Realism
A. Theory-Ladenness of Observations forces acting upon it.

 Anti-realists argue that observations are theory-laden, However, from an anti-realist standpoint, the
meaning they are influenced by the conceptual observation is theory-laden. The observation of the
frameworks and theoretical assumptions used to pendulum's motion is influenced by our conceptual
interpret them. framework and theoretical assumptions.

 They contend that observations are inherently shaped For instance, we may interpret the motion of the
by the theories and concepts scientists employ, making pendulum in terms of Newtonian mechanics or general
it difficult to establish a direct correspondence between relativity. The theory-ladenness becomes apparent
observations and an objective reality. when different theories or frameworks are used to
interpret the same observation.
Example
 Let's consider the observation of a pendulum swinging
back and forth. In a realist perspective, one might argue
that the observation of the pendulum's motion directly
corresponds to the underlying reality of gravitational
 B. Underdetermination Of Theory By Evidence
 Anti-realists assert that scientific theories are centuries. However, with the development of the
underdetermined by empirical evidence alone. This heliocentric model proposed by Copernicus, an
means that multiple theories can explain the same set alternative explanation emerged. Both the geocentric
of observations, and the available evidence cannot and heliocentric models could account for the
definitively determine the truth or falsehood of a observed planetary motions, albeit with different
theory. mathematical descriptions.
 Or The underdetermination of theory by evidenceAt the time, the available evidence, such as the
suggests that empirical evidence alone is insufficient observed positions and motions of planets, was
to uniquely determine the truth or falsehood of a consistent with both the geocentric and heliocentric
scientific theory. models. This illustrates the underdetermination of
 It implies that there can be multiple, equally theory by evidence.
consistent theories that explain the available evidence.The evidence alone did not definitively establish
 Example: Planet which model was the true representation of reality.

 The geocentric model, was widely accepted for

 C. Theoretical change and Incommensurability

 Theoretical change refers to the idea that scientific conceptual framework to be developed.
theories evolve, are revised, or sometimes even In summary, theoretical change highlights the
replaced over time. evolutionary nature of scientific theories, while
 Incommensurability is a concept in scientific anti- incommensurability points to the challenges of
realism that refers to the idea that scientific theories comparing or translating theories from different
are incommensurable when they cannot be compared scientific paradigms.
or evaluated using a common standard.
Example:
The shift from classical mechanics to quantum
mechanics.
 The shift from classical mechanics to quantum
mechanics involved a radical change in the way that
scientists understood the world, and required a new
 D. Instrumentalism and Pragmatism
 Instrumentalism and pragmatism are philosophical Pragmatism
positions within scientific anti-realism that emphasize
Pragmatism, similar to instrumentalism, emphasizes
the practical utility and effectiveness of scientific
the practical consequences and utility of scientific
theories rather than their truth or correspondence to
theories. Pragmatists argue that the value of scientific
reality.
theories lies in their ability to solve problems and
Instrumentalism: guide action.
 Instrumentalism posits that scientific theories should Example: The theory of evolution by natural
be valued primarily for their instrumental or selection
pragmatic usefulness in making accurate predictions
and facilitating technological advancements.
Example: Theory of gravity:
 E. Social and Cultural Factors
 The recognition that scientific knowledge is
influenced by social, cultural, and historical
contexts. These factors shape the development,
acceptance, and interpretation of scientific
theories.
 Prominent Proponents of Scientific Realism and Anti-
realism

Proponents of Scientific realism  Van Fraassen's view, known as constructive

The most prominent proponents of scientific realism empiricism, holds that scientific theories should be
evaluated based on their empirical adequacy, rather
include: Hilary Putnam and Richard Boyd.
than their truth or approximate truth.
 Putnam argued that scientific theories are
 According to van Fraassen, scientific theories are not
approximately true, and that their success in predicting
and explaining phenomena is evidence of their truth. intended to provide a true account of the world, but
rather to provide a framework for making predictions
 Boyd, on the other hand, believed that scientific and explanations based on observable phenomena.
theories are true because they are empirically

adequate, meaning that they accurately describe the Fine's view, known as the natural ontological attitude,
holds that we should accept the existence of only those
phenomena they are intended to explain.
entities that are required to explain the phenomena we
Proponents of Scientific Anti-realism observe, rather than postulating the existence of
 Proponents of scientific anti-realism, including: Bas unobservable entities that may or may not exist.
van Fraassen, Arthur Fine, and so forth.