History and Philosophy of Science as a Guide to Understanding Nature of Science

Abstract

Nature of science (NOS) is considered to be a controversial topic by historians, philosophers of science and science educators. It is paradoxical that we all teach science and still have difficulties in understanding what science is and how it develops and progresses. A major obstacle in understanding NOS is that science is primarily ‘unnatural’, that is it cannot be learned by a simple observation of phenomena. In most parts of the world history and philosophy of science are ‘inside’ science content and as such can guide our understanding of NOS. However, some science educators consider the ‘historical turn’ as dated and hence neglect the historical approach and instead emphasize the model based naturalist view of science. The objective of this presentation is to show that the historical approach is very much a part of teaching science and actually complements naturalism. Understanding NOS generally requires two aspects of science: Domain general and domain specific. In the classroom this can be illustrated by discussing the atomic models developed in the early 20th century which constitute the domain specific aspect of NOS. This can then lead to an understanding of the tentative nature of science that is a domain general aspect of NOS. A review of the literature in science education reveals three views (among others) of understanding NOS: a) Consensus view: It attempts to include only those domain-general NOS aspects that are the least controversial (Lederman, Abd-El-Khalick); b) Family resemblance view: Based on the ideas of Wittgenstein, this view promotes science as a cognitive system (Irzik, Nola); c) Integrated view: this view postulates that both domain general and domain specific aspects of NOS are not dichotomous but rather need to be integrated and are essential if we want students to understand ‘science in the making’ (Niaz). The following framework helps to facilitate integration: i) Elaboration of a theoretical framework based on presuppositions, guiding assumptions, and previous experience of the scientist; ii) Formulation of research questions; iii) Operationalizing heuristic principles; iv) Designing experiments; and v) Understanding NOS. Various examples from history of science are provided to show how understanding ‘science in the making’ is important in order to integrate domain general and domain specific aspects of NOS. It is concluded that the integrated view of NOS facilitates ‘science in the making’ as based on the postulation of alternative interpretations of experimental data, which are controversial and thus science is primarily a human enterprise.