ارزش‌باریِ علم و برهان تعیّن ناقص

Abstract

One of the important issues in the philosophy of science in recent decades is the evaluation of the possibility and necessity of purifying the process of science from values. The impact of scientific values ​​is not in dispute; But the involvement of unscientific values ​​for various reasons, including damage to the objectivity of science, is seriously questioned. One of the most important arguments of the proponents of this influence is the reliance on the incomplete determination of the hypothesis based on the available evidence and rules. It is common in science that sometimes the set of available evidence, along with logical and scientific rules, does not lead us to a definite conclusion, and there are still a few alternatives. Now, since the scientific components are supposed to be incapable of fully defining the hypothesis, the choice among them will be based on unscientific values. The most important challenge in advancing this defense is to undermine the objectivity of science; Because the gap between the hypothesis and the scientific components is filled with unscientific factors, and this is a teleological and pragmatic view of science, not a realistic one. Also, the factors influencing the choice of theory in the case of incomplete determination are non-scientific values ​​and the final choice can be considered as the result of personality traits or abnormal environmental and cultural factors. One of the important issues in the philosophy of science in recent decades is the evaluation of the possibility and necessity of purifying the process of science from values. The impact of scientific values ​​is not in dispute; But the involvement of unscientific values ​​for various reasons, including damage to the objectivity of science, is seriously questioned. One of the most important arguments of the proponents of this influence is the reliance on the incomplete determination of the hypothesis based on the available evidence and rules. It is common in science that sometimes the set of available evidence, along with logical and scientific rules, does not lead us to a definite conclusion, and there are still a few alternatives. Now, since the scientific components are supposed to be incapable of fully defining the hypothesis, the choice among them will be based on unscientific values. The most important challenge in advancing this defense is to undermine the objectivity of science; Because the gap between the hypothesis and the scientific components is filled with unscientific factors, and this is a teleological and pragmatic view of science, not a realistic one. Also, the factors influencing the choice of theory in the case of incomplete determination are non-scientific values ​​and the final choice can be considered as the result of personality traits or abnormal environmental and cultural factors. One of the important issues in the philosophy of science in recent decades is the evaluation of the possibility and necessity of purifying the process of science from values. The impact of scientific values ​​is not in dispute; But the involvement of unscientific values ​​for various reasons, including damage to the objectivity of science, is seriously questioned. One of the most important arguments of the proponents of this influence is the reliance on the incomplete determination of the hypothesis based on the available evidence and rules. It is common in science that sometimes the set of available evidence, along with logical and scientific rules, does not lead us to a definite conclusion, and there are still a few alternatives. Now, since the scientific components are supposed to be incapable of fully defining the hypothesis, the choice among them will be based on unscientific values.