We spend the day prepping for the seminar, notably going over Locke and Popper - notes below. We chose numbers out of a hat and then signed up for our groups as follows: (if you're not on the list below please email me and I'll put you in either Group 2 or 3 - first come first served, max 11 in a group :-)
Seminar 1 - - Monday - Francis Bacon and the New Method
(Previous Day 1 Group Siobhan, Nirubaa, Rachael, Nicole, Kaitlyn T.,Chelsea , Kandis, Jaslynn, Sara, Ashley K., Holly (11))
New Group: Ashley K, Nicole, Sara, Emily, Dana, Kaitlyn B., Kim, Taylor
Seminar 2 - Tuesday - John Locke and the Essay on Human Understanding
(Previous Day 2 Group - Emily, Taylor, Kim, Liny, Avery, August, Kyle, Jake, Rhiannon, Carly, Dani (11))
New Group: Ashley S., Kandis, Kaitlyn T., Avery, August, Jaslynn, Rhiannon, Dani, Michelle, Liny, Chelsea
Seminar 3 - Wednesday and Karl Popper on Falsifiability
(Previous Day 3 group - Lorenzo, Kaitlyn B., Ashley S., Nick, Jade, Cassie, Chris, Michelle, Dana, Ryan, Justin (11)
New Group: Justin, Carly, Kyle, Jake, Lorenzo, Ryan, Rachael, Chris, Nick
If you're not on a list above please email me and I'll put you in a group of your choice.
Notes on Locke -
Discusses how we think and perceive - through language, logic, religion. Our biggest problem as people is that we fail to see the limits of our understanding.
Biggest argument - we are NOT born with innate knowledge, a priori knowledge. Plato and Descartes argued that we were. Came up with the concept of a blank slate, "tabula rasa". We can only know things if we first experience them.
Robert Boyle - Corpuscular Hypothesis of Matter - the matter is made up of tiny, invisible particles. This gave Locke the idea that even though we cannot detect these tiny particles, they still exist, and they give matter its properties (size, shape, movement).
Science can define these properties but is still limited.
Locked examined:
1. Where our ideas come from
2. What it means to have these ideas and what exactly are these ideas
3. Issues of faith and opinion
Argued against a priori knowledge. Plato and Descartes said there many universal bits of knowledge. But, Locked said that there are no things accepted by ALL humans.
Also argued that people cannot have ideas in their minds of which they are not aware. He said that we cannot possess even the most basic principles unless we are taught them or have thought them through.
So, I guess Locke was happy with how he eliminated a priori knowledge.
Two sources of knowledge, Simple and Complex:
Simple Ideas:
1. ideas we get from a single sense (sight, or taste)
2. ideas we get from many senses (shape, size)
3. ideas coming from reflection on experiences
4. ideas coming from a combination of sensation and reflection (unity, existence, pain, substance)
Within Simple ideas there are:
Primary Qualities: texture, number, size, shape, motion - these resemble their causes
Secondary Qualities: colour, sounds, taste, smell - these do not resemble their causes
Complex Ideas:
Complex ideas combine, compare and abstract (subtracting everything until you're left with the item/idea)
Locke had a problem with the language we use to describe knowledge:
1. a word can imply a complex idea
2. words have no standard meaning
3. people use words without knowing what they really mean
4. we use words inconsistently
5. we change the meanings of words
6. we assume that others understand us
Locke argued that KNOWLEDGE is the relation between ideas, all of which is in the mind. We produce knowledge:
1. Identity (blue is blue), diversity (blue is not yellow)
2. relation (explain a triangle, then explain another triangle similarly and they are congruent)
3. coexistence (iron is affected by magnetism)
4. realizing that existence belongs to the ideas themselves, and is not in the mind.
Notes on Sir Karl Popper on Falsifiability
Bottom line on the Scientific Method is that science is trial and error.
This idea, widely accepted today, defines the Modern Scientific Method - learning from our mistakes.
Falsifiability - logical possibility that a hypothesis or theory can be contradicted by an observation or the outcome of an experiment.
"All Swans are White" - this IS falsifiable - we can go looking for swans and note their colour. So, falsification tests for falseness instead of testing for correctness.
"White Swans Do Exist" - this is NOT falsifiable - no counter-example is logically possible.
Popper stressed that unfalsifiable statements are important in science because they can and should be embedded. E.g., while "all people are mortal" is NOT falsifiable, it IS a logical consequence of the true statement, "Every human dies before the age of 150."
Science is a successive rejection of falsified theories - when newer work shows improved or different results, they supersede previous work.
According to Popper and Anceriz, no hypothesis is EVER confirmed. The best we can hope for is that a hypothesis survives so many tests that it's just silly to keep testing it.
It's at that point that we start to consider it a FACT - even though it remains in the realm of theory or hypothesis.
Popper explains how science developed from myths.
No comments:
Post a Comment