Scientific Theory Construction Research Articles

Сучасні аспекти методології наукових досліджень у фінансовій сфері

The article analyzes the theoretical and practical aspects of the concepts of "method" and "methodology" of scientific research in the financial sphere. The study analyzed general and special methods of scientific research that are widely used in the construction of scientific theories and concepts in financial science and practice. The influence of the martial law on the development of science and the financial sphere of the economy of Ukraine is significant and has many aspects. The article examines the concept of the methodology of a systematic approach to scientific research, which allows comprehensively solving financial problems under the influence of controversial factors.

Abstraction and Generalization in the Logic of Science: Cases from Nineteenth-Century Scientific Practice

Abstraction and generalization are two processes of reasoning that have a special role in the construction of scientific theories and models. They have been important parts of the scientific method...

Why Big Bang is so Accepted and Popular: Some Contributions of a Thematic Analysis

Some important and decisive observations allowed a widespread and almost unquestionable acceptance of the big bang cosmology, but we can admit and search other factors that have contributed and continue to contribute to the enormous acceptance and great popularity of this cosmological conception, not only inside but also outside of cosmology and even in numerous no scientific contexts. To find some of those factors, a case study was undertaken based on thematic analysis, an analytical tool which is based on the idea that the scientific activity, in addition to a theoretical and an experimental dimensions, has a third dimension with psychological and cultural elements called themata that strongly influence the construction of scientific theories and also their acceptance or rejection. This case study focused on the most important founding texts of big bang cosmology, namely articles and books of Alexandre Friedmann, Georges Lemaitre, and George Gamow, covering three decades of important developments (1922–1952), and the founding texts of its great rival, the steady-state cosmology. This article presents a summary of the main results of this case study, which allowed to identify several themata with a very important role in the big bang cosmology: differentiation and unification (methodological themata); unity, creation, change, evolution, constancy (of mass/energy), simplicity, life cycle, circularity, and disorder (conceptual themata). All these themata form a methodological and conceptual matrix—with a triple dimension: historical, transversal/cultural, and psychological—that can help explain the acceptance and popularity of the big bang cosmology within and beyond its disciplinary boundaries.

Objeto em perspectiva e sujeito em devir na epistemologia histórica de Gaston Bachelard

A epistemologia histórica, que tem em Gaston Bachelard um de seus principais expoentes, foi criticada muitas vezes como sendo idealista, uma vez que interpretaria a evolução histórica das teorias científicas de um modo relativamente autônomo, independentemente de seu contexto social ou do sujeito humano produtor da ciência. Este artigo busca demonstrar como, ao menos no caso de Bachelard, há sim uma preocupação para com o sujeito da ciência, que está implicado na construção das teorias científicas, mas não como seu mero produtor, e sim como seu efeito. Trata-se do tema de uma pedagogia científica que se opera constituindo e modificando o sujeito de conhecimento na medida em que os objetos científicos, por sua vez, também são o efeito de uma mise-en-perspective do conhecimento.

Before Laboratory Life: Perry, Sullivan and the missed encounter between psychoanalysis and STS

This article explores the potential fruitfulness of an encounter between psychoanalysis and science and technology studies (STS) by examining Perry’s (The Human Nature of Science: Researchers at Work in Psychiatry, The Free Press, New York, 1966) book, and its intellectual and socio-cultural background. From his close observation of experimental LSD therapy in a psychiatric research center in the USA, Perry seminally claimed—a decade ahead of similar claims in STS—the social construction of scientific theory. His work, being idiosyncratic as a hybrid of STS and psychoanalysis in terms of both his research subject and research framework, later sank into complete oblivion. Examined here, first, is the parallel development of the reflexivity concept in both STS and psychoanalysis: Harry S. Sullivan’s pivotal role in introducing sociological reflexivity into the latter is detailed. Second, the predicament of mental institutions in the post-war USA is identified as the important milieu that allowed such diverse approaches as Erving Goffman’s Asylums. The highlighted potential of Perry’s work vis-a-vis contemporary STS is its reflexive ethnography that combines research ethics with emotional dynamics in situ. This contribution is contrasted with its limited applicability to large-scale social issues, another lesson we learn from this historical reflection.

Theological Influences in Scientific Research Programs: Natural Theology “in Reverse”

ABSTRACTThe Boyle Lectures were created to promote natural theology, where science leads to belief in God. Russell's 2017 Boyle Lecture moves in the ‘opposite’ direction, showing how theological convictions held, often implicitly, by research scientists can play a creative role in both the construction of scientific theories and the choice between existing theories. As examples, Russell explores the conflicts over Big Bang versus Steady-State cosmologies, and between Einstein and Bohr about quantum mechanics. Against the claim that these influences die off once the conflict is over, Russell shows that they continue to be inherited by successive generations of scientists.

О двух функциях понятий в научном познании права

The function of the concept of law in scientific knowledge is shown as an exact idea about the signs of law distinguishing it from the other objects. Another logical function of concept of law is in the ability to reflect in thoughts more or less complete result, the amount of knowledge about the law. It is argued that the essence of law can be known, provided the pre-obtained full and complete knowledge of the law as a special subject of scientific knowledge. The possibility of using logical principles of the construction of scientific theories in the science theory of law.

Analogical modeling: a strategy for developing theories in psychology

The value of analogical modeling in scientific theory construction has been endorsed by a number of philosophers of science (e.g., Hesse, 1966; Harre, 1976; Abrantes, 1999). This article provides a brief overview of the important, but neglected, research strategy of analogical modeling. The strategy has proved to be a valuable resource for the development of many scientific theories. It can be a valuable resource for developing psychological theories as well.

More Thoughts on HPS: Another 20 Years Later

This essay deals with the recent history of the disputes about the relation between history and philosophy of science and the merits and prospects of HPS as an intellectual endeavor. I begin with a brief outline of the debates in the late 1960s and 1970s. At that time, several philosophers of science argued that philosophical analysis was interpretive and that understanding a concept or practice involved understanding how it came about. More recently, however, philosophical studies of science have been likened to scientific theory construction. One basic idea permeates recent debates, namely, that pursuing HPS means confronting general philosophical frameworks with historical data. I argue that this “confrontation model” of HPS is highly problematic and should be abandoned. Instead, we should appreciate (again) that philosophical reflection on science is interpretive, and that historicist analyses of scientific, methodological, and epistemological concepts augment our understanding of science.

Theory of Journalism as an Open System

The article stands the actual ontological and epistemological preconditions of the theory of journalism. The new century in the social sciences is characterized by the convergence of the processes that contribute to the growth needs to consider the theory of journalism as an open system, permanently updating with fresh ideas and concepts. The author analyzes experts’ answers to a formalized questionnaire in the field theory of journalism: 1) What corresponds the concept of the theory of journalism as an open system to? 2) How are important the theoretical researches of foreign colleagues for media studies in Russia? 3) Does it make sense to raise the question of any influence of the Russian experts in the field theory of journalism on the scientific discourse abroad? 4) To which extent fundamental philosophical differences hinder the construction of scientific theories of journalism as an open and adversarial system? 5) Are there any new trends of analysis in Russia today? 6) What are the current areas of journalism and mass communication that has not been the subject of discussion yet? This distance discussion summarizes the new and open to debate issue - the role of the subject of media research which looks at the functions of journalism and the media within the subject matter. But there is another view from the outside - society. So it should deal with the intersections of the two types of functions formed by the “internal law” of a life of journalism and the laws of social development.

Some Misconceptions about Scientific Sociological Theory

I review and discuss the articles in this issue by Walker, by Wagner, and by Heidtman et al. There are three main themes that appear in all three papers; these flow from the shared commitment among these authors to understanding and promoting “scientific theory construction” within sociology, and to dispelling some common misconceptions about scientific sociological theory. The common themes that run through the three papers can be put in the form of questions: 1) What is a theory? 2) How should we evaluate theory? 3) How does theory grow? In addition to discussing these three main themes, I discuss four sub-themes that emerged: 1) Sociology as a Scientific Endeavor; 2) Critiques of General Theory as Being Positivistic; 3) Unitary versus Multiple Forms of Theory Building; 4) Professional / Disciplinary Barriers to Theory Construction and Theory Building in Sociology.

Styles of scientific thinking

It is a main contention of this paper that the history of science is not so much a story of the progressive advance in our understanding and discovery of ‘the facts of nature’, but rather, an account of different ways of ‘seeing’ things; where ‘the things’ thus seen are to a considerable extent themselves the result of ‘realizational’ processes operating in terms of some theory or other. But further, such theories are in turn controlled by some respective methodology which has its history: with the latter itself a record of different views about those elements believed to be essential for any adequate constructionof scientific theories. The paper then distinguishes between three views, the ‘rationalist’, the ‘empiricist’, and the ‘systemic’ processing of scientific ‘facts’; the last-named view operating under the guidance of certain leading maxims and principles. Finally, the paper formulates a triadic type of methodology whose three components mirror the three views just mentioned: the ‘probative’, the ‘explicative’ and the ‘systemic’ components; which in turn are then shown to generate three corresponding ontologies.

Why most sociologists don't (and won't) think evolutionarily

The general failure of sociologists to understand, much less accept, an evolutionary perspective on human behavior transcends mere ignorance and ideological bias, although it incorporates a good deal of both. It also includes a general anthropocentric discomfort with evolutionary thinking, a self-interested resistance to self-understanding, and a trained sociological incapacity to accept the fundamental canons of scientific theory construction: reductionism, individualism, materialism, and parsimony.

CRITIQUING THE NEW EPISTEMOLOGIES: TOWARDMINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR A SCIENTIFIC THEORY OF FAMILY THERAPY*

The purpose of this paper is to critically analyze the structures of the new epistemologies. Epistemology is a technical term within the field of scientific philosophy. When it is used looselyby family therapists, confusion results. The central argument of the present author is that the new epistemologies are, in fact, weak theories. It is suggested that the practice of using the term “epistemology” to denote theory or paradigm, be discontinued. A more limited and narrowly defined use for the term “epistemology” is proposed. Specifically, this paper presents: (a) a discussion ofthree areas of philosophy that serve as foundations for the construction of scientific theory, (b)a critical analysis of the new epistemologies, (c) a logical structure for scientific family therapy theory, and (d) minimum requirements for a scientific theory of family therapy.

Sex Bias, Ethnocentrism, and Myth Building in Anthropology: The Case of Universal Male Dominance

Currently flourishing comparative studies of and by women have raised challenging questions for anthropological research and theory building. Although male bias has been widely discussed, other sources of bias are also seen to be at work, and their effects, it is argued, are not limited to research concerning the position of women. Myth building, instead of the construction of scientific theories, may result. The theory of a universal male dominance is used to illustrate this point.

Causal and action models in social psychiatry.

A GROWING appreciation for the limitations of psychoanalytic theory has developed within recent years. Although still the most comprehensive and fecund theory of human psychology, it has left important gaps in both theory and practice which have pushed us on in new directions, ever in search of more inclusive models. It has been accepted as a fundamental principle of scientific theory construction that you don't know why certain things happen then invent a mechanism (in accordance with the view you take of how the world works)—but it is better still if you find out how nature really works. 1 This, of course, is the process of model construction. In science we strive for the development of laws governing the phenomena to be explained. In the realm of behavior and its psychological roots we are deeply committed to the construction of models since we are a

VI—Metaphor, Model and Mechanism

WHEN Adbul Khayyum began public 'bus services to remote areas of the North West Frontier Province certain mullahs objected on the ground that the absence of horses drawing the vehicles implied the presence of djinns under the bonnet. They were induced to withdraw their objections by being shown the actual mechanism by which 'buses were propelled. This story illustrates a fundamental principle of scientific theory construction: