Empiricism and Observation
100
Question: According to the traditional empiricist view of science, what is the most important source of scientific knowledge?
A. Tradition
B. Observation and sensory experience
C. Revelation
D. Intuition
Answer: B. Observation and sensory experience
Question: What is the main goal of deductive reasoning?
A. To show that a conclusion is probably true
B. To show that a conclusion must be true if the premises are true
C. To generalize from repeated observations
D. To predict future events
Answer: B
Question: According to Hume, our belief in induction is ultimately based on:
A. Pure reason
B. Mathematical proof
C. Habit or custom
D. Scientific authority
Answer: C
Question: For Kuhn, a paradigm includes:
A. Only a list of scientific laws
B. Only experimental data
C. Fundamental theoretical assumptions and exemplars
D. A theory that has been permanently proven true
Answer: C
What does the thesis of underdetermination claim?
A. There is always only one theory compatible with the evidence.
B. Evidence alone may be compatible with multiple theories.
C. Scientific theories never make predictions.
D. Social factors determine every scientific belief.
B
Question: Which of the following is not one of the traditional empiricist assumptions about observation?
A. Observations are equally available to careful, unprejudiced observers.
B. Observations are prior to and independent of theory.
C. Repeated observations provide a firm basis for scientific knowledge.
D. Observations can never be influenced by expectations or prior beliefs.
Answer: D
Question: Which statement best describes inductive reasoning?
A. It guarantees its conclusion.
B. It is valid only if all premises are definitions.
C. It aims to show that a conclusion is likely to be true.
D. It never uses past observations.
Answer: C
Question: What does Popper think science should primarily try to do?
A. Confirm hypotheses
B. Falsify hypotheses
C. Prove theories with certainty
D. Eliminate all background assumptions
Answer: B
During normal science, Kuhn says scientists mainly engage in:
A. Rejecting all existing theories
B. Puzzle solving within the existing paradigm
C. Searching for completely new paradigms
D. Ignoring all evidence
Answer: B
Question: Which view says that if our best scientific theories refer to unobservable entities such as atoms, we have reason to believe those entities really exist?
A. Scientific antirealism
B. Scientific realism
C. Social constructivism
D. Strong program sociology
B
Question: A trained radiologist and an untrained person look at the same medical image but report very different things. What problem does this raise for the claim that observations are equally available to all observers?
It raises the possibility that training and prior knowledge affect what people are able to observe or recognize, so observation may not be equally available in practice.
Someone says: “Every raven I have seen in this region is black, so the next raven I see will probably be black.” Is this deductive or inductive reasoning, and why?
Inductive reasoning.
Question: According to Popper, a hypothesis survives repeated testing and all of its predictions continue to succeed. What are scientists justified in saying about it?
Answer: They may say it is not yet falsified, but they should not conclude that it has been proven or confirmed true.
Scientists discover one result that does not fit the accepted theory. According to Kuhn, does this automatically cause a scientific revolution? Explain.
No.
Two different theories can both be adjusted so that they fit the same evidence. What philosophical problem does this illustrate?
Underdetermination.
Question: Explain the difference between asking whether observations are reliable and whether they are neutral.
Explain Hume’s problem of induction in your own words.
Hume argues that we rely on the past to predict the future, but this requires assuming that nature will continue behaving uniformly. The problem is that our only justification for believing nature is uniform comes from past experience, which itself uses induction. Therefore, the justification becomes circular.
Question: Explain Strawson’s response to the problem of induction.
Answer: Strawson argues that induction does not need a further justification because following inductive rules is part of what we mean by reasoning reasonably. Asking whether the induction rule itself is reasonable would require a higher-level rule for judging the rule, and Strawson denies that such a higher rule is needed.
Explain one important difference between the traditional view of science and Kuhn’s view.
The traditional view says scientists should continually test and revise even fundamental theories when contrary evidence appears. Kuhn argues that during normal science, scientists usually hold fundamental assumptions fixed and try to fit conflicting evidence into the current paradigm.
Explain the difference between scientific realism and scientific antirealism.
Scientists in two competing research traditions observe the same experiment but interpret the result differently because each group accepts a different background theory. Why does this challenge the traditional empiricist picture of science?
It challenges the idea that observation is completely theory-independent and neutral. If accepted theories shape what scientists take themselves to observe, then observations may not provide a purely neutral foundation for deciding between competing theories.
A student responds to Hume by saying, “Induction has worked successfully in the past, so that proves it will continue to work in the future.” Why would Hume reject this response?
Because the student is using induction to justify induction.
Reichenbach says: “Either nature is uniform or it is not.” Explain how this is supposed to defend using induction.
Two paradigms use the same scientific term, but the term has a different meaning within each theoretical framework. What Kuhnian concept does this illustrate, and why does it make paradigm comparison difficult?
Incommensurability.
Imagine a scientific community in which every scientist is extremely conservative and refuses to seriously consider radically new theories. According to Miriam Solomon’s view in the notes, why might this make the scientific community less successful?
Because successful science requires a balance between conservative and revolutionary approaches.