Issues In Philosophy Of Science Research Articles

Betting blind: coping with uncertainty through redundancy

Multiple biological groups, such as ant colonies, appear to have a noteworthy inefficiency: they contain vast amounts of redundant members that are not strictly needed to maintain the group. Philosophers and biologists have proposed that such inefficiency is illusory because redundancy enhances the resilience of groups when living under harsh conditions. Still, this proposal is unsatisfactory in different respects. First, it is too vague to account for when redundancy is selectively advantageous. Furthermore, it overlooks cases in which redundancy fails to increase the resilience of groups. This paper offers an account of group redundancy that addresses these difficulties. Specifically, it advances the hypothesis that the mere presence of harsh conditions is not what drives the evolution of redundancy; rather, it is the fact organisms are often unable to predict when they will face harsh conditions. Redundancy enables groups to properly respond to unpredictable circumstances without resorting to the unreliable detection systems of their members. A better understanding of the phenomenon of redundancy is likely to impact other key issues in philosophy of science, including the evolution of cooperation and transitions in individuality, and the role of redundancy in complex systems, be they biological or not.

Metalogical Remarks on Induction

The problem of induction belongs to the most controversial issues in philosophy of science. If induction is understood widely, it covers every fallible inference, that is, such that its conclusion is not logically entailed by its premises. This paper analyses so-called reductive induction, that is, reasoning in which premises follow from the conclusion, but the reverse relation does not hold. Two issues are taken into account, namely the definition of reductive inference and its justification. The analysis proposed in the paper employs metalogical tools. The author agrees with the view that a quantitative account of degree of confirmation for universal theories via logical probability is problematic. However, prospect for a qualitative approach look as more promising. Using the construction of maximally consistent sets allows to distinguish good and worthless induction as well as shows how to understand induction in a semantic way. A closer analysis of deductivism in the theory of justification shows that it is a hidden inductivism.

Single-case experimental designs: Characteristics, changes, and challenges.

Tactics of Scientific Research (Sidman, 1960) provides a visionary treatise on single-case designs, their scientific underpinnings, and their critical role in understanding behavior. Since the foundational base was provided, single-case designs have proliferated especially in areas of application where they have been used to evaluate interventions with an extraordinary range of clients, settings, and target foci. This article highlights core features of single-case experimental designs, how key and ancillary features of the designs have evolved, the special strengths of the designs, and challenges that have impeded their integration in many areas where their contributions are sorely needed. The article ends by placing the methodological approach in the context of other research traditions. In this way, the discussion moves from the specific designs toward foundations and philosophy of science issues in keeping with the strengths of the person and book we are honoring.

Live empirical issues in debates over objectivity in the social sciences

Questions of objectivity involve many general philosophy of science issues; when directed toward the social sciences, even more complex issues surface about the status of the social sciences, e.g. can they be sciences as are the natural sciences? This paper does not take on this mass of issues directly, but instead argues for more restricted theses, in particular that questions about objectivity in the social sciences are often usefully seen as local empirical issues. I look at arguments around underdetermination, value ladenness, the indeterminancy or nonquantitative nature of social science categories or attributes, and traditional ontological debates over materialism and idealism. I show that in all these cases some of the key issues about objectivity are specific empirical issues in the social sciences.

The Rationality of the Process of Theory Change in Science

This article gives an ephemeral overview of the most influential views on the nature and process of change in science. Theory change in science is one of the most important issues in philosophy of science. Scientific theories are subject to change beyond space and time. There are various factors that lead theories change such as discomfort among the theories. In this paper, discussing how the rationality of science was related with its methods and methodologies, I tried to show that it was after Kuhn’s work the Structure of Scientific Revolutions that the debate on theory choice becomes a central issue in philosophy of science. Following this the process in theory change in science can be deductive and inductive or rational and non-rational. According to the account of Kuhn’s scientific change there are four steps in the process of scientific change; the predominant one is normal science, anomalies, crisis and finally a new phase of normal science. Then I discussed some of the philosophers who criticize Kuhn’s work Structure of Scientific Revolutions, particularly popper’s criticism on Kuhn; in this regard I also forwarded Kuhn’s response for his critics. Finally I critically compared Kuhn’s and Popper’s ideas on the evolution of science.

Complexity and integration. A philosophical analysis of how cancer complexity can be faced in the era of precision medicine

Complexity and integration are longstanding widely debated issues in philosophy of science and recent contributions have largely focused on biology and biomedicine. This paper specifically considers some methodological novelties in cancer research, motivated by various features of tumours as complex diseases, and shows how they encourage some rethinking of philosophical discourses on those topics. In particular, we discuss the integrative-cluster approach, and analyse its potential in the epistemology of cancer. We suggest that, far from being the solution to tame cancer complexity, this approach offers a philosophically interesting new manner of considering integration, and show how it can help addressing the apparent contrast between a pluralistic and a unitary account.

Communicating with scientific graphics: A descriptive inquiry into non-ideal normativity

Scientists’ graphical practices have recently become a target of inquiry in the philosophy of science, and in the cognitive sciences. Here I supplement our understanding of graphical practices via a case study of how researchers crafted the graphics for scientific publication in the field of circadian biology. The case highlights social aspects of graphical production which have gone understudied – especially concerning the negotiation of publication. I argue that it also supports a challenge to the claim that empirically-informed “cognitive design principles” offer an apt understanding of the norms of success which govern good scientific graphic design to communicate data and hypotheses to other experts. In this respect, the case-study also illustrates how “descriptive” studies of scientific practice can connect with normative issues in philosophy of science, thereby addressing a central concern in recent discussions of practice-oriented philosophy of science.

On the Implications and Extensions of Luk’s Theory and Model of Scientific Study

Recently, Luk tried to establish a model and a theory of scientific studies. He focused on articulating the theory and the model, but he did not emphasize relating them to some issues in philosophy of science. In addition, they might explain some of the issues in philosophy of science, but such explanation is not articulated in his papers. This paper explores the implications and extensions of Luk’s work in philosophy of science or science in general.

Ensino carregado de teoria: uma experiência inspiradora junto ao Grupo “Epistemologia, História e Didática das Ciências Naturais”

ResumoNeste texto, documentamos uma experiência recente de testemunho das atividades de um grupo de pesquisa (liderado pelo Prof. Dr. Agustín Adúriz-Bravo) empenhado em conceber, discutir e aplicar modos de aprimoramento do ensino de ciências. Chama a atenção seu especial compromisso com questões ligadas à Filosofia da Ciência – fato que faz emergir no seio do grupo o interesse pela capacitação epistemológica de atuais e futuros mestres. No artigo apresentamos as características gerais do grupo, destacando a natureza da produção intelectual de seu mentor, Adúriz-Bravo. Ademais, ressaltamos valor e mérito dos estudos – predicados que, a nosso juízo, poderiam ser inspiradores de uma nova perspectiva para as pesquisas em Ensino de Geografia.Palavras-chave: Ensino e Epistemologia; Grupo “GEHyD”; Unidades Didáticas. AbstractIn this paper, we report a recent witness experience of the activities of a research group (led by Prof. Dr. Agustín Aduriz-Bravo), engaged in designing, discuss and apply enhancement modes of science education. Draws attention their special commitment to Philosophy of Science issues – a fact that expresses an interest in epistemological training of current and future teachers. The paper presents the general characteristics of the group, highlighting the nature of the intellectual production of his mentor, Adúriz-Bravo. Furthermore, we emphasize value and merit of these studies – qualities that, in our opinion, could inspiring a new perspective for Geography Teaching research.Keywords: Teaching and Epistemology; “GEHyD” Group; Didactical Units. ResumenEn este trabajo, se presenta una experiencia reciente de testimonio de las actividades de de un grupo de investigación (dirigido por el Prof. Dr. Agustín Adúriz-Bravo) dedicado a diseñar, reflexionar y aplicar modos de perfeccionamiento de la educación científica. Llama la atención su especial compromiso con los temas de la Filosofía de la Ciencia – hecho que expresa un interés en la formación epistemológica de los actuales y futuros profesores. El artículo presenta las características generales del grupo, destacando la naturaleza de la producción intelectual de su mentor, Adúriz-Bravo. Además, resalta valor y mérito de estos estudios – virtudes que, en nuestra opinión, podrían inspirar a una nueva perspectiva para la investigación en Enseñanza de la Geografía.Palavras-chave: Enseñanza y Epistemología; Grupo “GEHyD”; Unidades Didácticas.

The Resistance to Belief

Article exploring situations, using a recent near-death experience (NDE) example, in which there are reasonable evidence and logic, and yet belief seems to be withheld. The author postulates and discusses nonrational influences producing resistance to belief, including the fear of being in error, the fear of rejection from the scientific community, irrational requirements of logicality, avoidance of consequences, and paradigm fixation, as well as discussing issues in philosophy of science and epistemology in regard to proof.

Qualitative research in sport and exercise psychology: observations of a non-qualitative researcher

The authors of articles examining quantitative and qualitative research frequently highlight and over-emphasise the differences in these two research paradigms. Differences are typically portrayed as dichotomous vs. differences in emphasis or degree. Additionally, similarities and shared middle ground are often ignored. The above perspective can lead to incomplete, inaccurate and misleading reviews on both types of research. Furthermore, the above commentaries can discourage genuine dialogue among researchers from both areas. In the current paper, I hope to avoid the above approaches and focus on legitimate differences as well as similarities among qualitative and quantitative research. In brief, I discuss areas of legitimate and substantial differences: philosophy of science issues and reality. I then examine areas where differences of a dubious nature are discussed because they are based on inaccuracies and straw men. Finally, I briefly discuss writing style followed by an examination of areas of agreement that are often overlooked.

Studying spirituality scientifically: reflections, considerations, recommendations

Spirituality has become the focus of growing attention by scholars over the past few decades in a variety of disciplines including psychology, nursing, medicine, social work, counseling, and business. Despite this attention, confusion and controversy exists regarding what spirituality is and whether or not it is even worthy of being considered a scientific construct. In this essay, the author provides an overview of the methodology and philosophy of science issues that accompany the study of spirituality. Thereafter, he proffers an empirically derived descriptive taxonomic model of spirituality for use in research and theory development. The essay ends with recommendations for future investigations on spirituality.

Thinking Programmatically About Research

More than once over the past several years, I have been asked to make a presentation on my program of research. Of course, this is always my favorite speaking assignment. More recently, however, I was tasked with assisting a group of more fledgling nurse scholars to develop their programs of research. While also a very enjoyable and certainly a longer ranging assignment, I am finding that the effort also is considerably more intellectually challenging. To illustrate the meaning and process of developing a program of research for these more novice researchers, I could easily rely on my own work as a point of reference, but that is certainly not enough to provide a model or paradigm that can serve the diversity of interests within the group. Therefore, I set out to locate some explicit and structured guidance to share with them for thinking about research programmatically. The literature was replete with dozens-even hundreds-of examples of research programs on a wide array of topics and at all scales of magnitude. However, I found little explicit guidance on how to proceed in conceptualizing a specific program of research. Nevertheless charged with moving this group of individuals forward to do just that, what I can offer them and here are my thoughts on the matter. These thoughts are based largely on my experience in attempting to develop my own meaningful program of nursing research and my exposure over the years to various established nursing research programs; they are also supported by current published and national paradigms inspired by the "bench to bedside" (and beyond) movement emanating in recent years from the National Institutes of Health (NIH). BEGINNING AT THE BEGINNING: WHAT IS A PROGRAM OF RESEARCH? It seems that the notion of a research program derives from efforts by Lakatos to resolve an issue in philosophy of science between Popper's strict falsificationism and Kuhn's revolutionary structure of science. In brief, Lakatos (Lakatos, 1978; Lakatos & Musgrave, 1970) sought to explain the process by which scientists evolved and evaluated theories such that the basis for concluding superiority (rather than truth or falsity) of one over another was both rational (i.e., it resolved Popper's problem of counterevidence) and consistent with the behavior of scientists (i.e., the doing of Kuhnian normal science during which counter evidence is seemingly unaddressed until the sudden emergence of new theories that better encompass or account for them). Lakatos used the term research programme to refer to a succession of studies to advance a central idea or theory (termed the hard core) over time, during which slightly varying versions of it (in the form of auxiliary hypotheses) were evaluated by devising and applying new and evolving research methods. When such programs of study succeeded in building support for the central theory by revealing new and remarkable facts, generating new experimental approaches, and resulting in more precise predictions, they were considered progressive; those programs unable to build support or generate new facts were considered as degenerating. Lakatos's notions were illuminating, but perhaps somewhat removed from the current experience and practical purpose at hand for these researchers. What was needed was a definition for what I was calling a program of research that could guide these young researchers to conceptualize a direction for their work. In a limited but effortful search of the literature and World Wide Web, I found only one on Wikipedia that defined a research program as "a coordinated set of projects undertaking related research, often at national or even international level, with government funding" ("Research Program," 2009, para. 1). Believing that definition to lack clarity and to impose unnecessary restrictions for my purpose, I devised my own definition, thusly, as an advancing series or cluster of studies under the leadership of a scientist or a group of scientists that systematically builds knowledge in a focal area. …

Thinking Programmatically About Research

More than once over the past several years, I have been asked to make presentation on my program of research. Of course, this is always my favorite speaking assignment. More recently, however, I was tasked with assisting group of more fledgling nurse scholars to develop their programs of research. While also very enjoyable and certainly longer ranging assignment, I am finding that the effort also is considerably more intellectually challenging. To illustrate the meaning and process of developing program of research for these more novice researchers, I could easily rely on my own work as point of reference, but that is certainly not enough to provide model or paradigm that can serve the diversity of interests within the group. Therefore, I set out to locate some explicit and structured guidance to share with them for thinking about research programmatically. The literature was replete with dozens-even hundreds-of examples of research programs on wide array of topics and at all scales of magnitude. However, I found little explicit guidance on how to proceed in conceptualizing specific program of research. Nevertheless charged with moving this group of individuals forward to do just that, what I can offer them and here are my thoughts on the matter. These thoughts are based largely on my experience in attempting to develop my own meaningful program of nursing research and my exposure over the years to various established nursing research programs; they are also supported by current published and national paradigms inspired by the bench to bedside (and beyond) movement emanating in recent years from the National Institutes of Health (NIH). BEGINNING AT THE BEGINNING: WHAT IS A PROGRAM OF RESEARCH? It seems that the notion of research program derives from efforts by Lakatos to resolve an issue in philosophy of science between Popper's strict falsificationism and Kuhn's revolutionary structure of science. In brief, Lakatos (Lakatos, 1978; Lakatos & Musgrave, 1970) sought to explain the process by which scientists evolved and evaluated theories such that the basis for concluding superiority (rather than truth or falsity) of one over another was both rational (i.e., it resolved Popper's problem of counterevidence) and consistent with the behavior of scientists (i.e., the doing of Kuhnian normal science during which counter evidence is seemingly unaddressed until the sudden emergence of new theories that better encompass or account for them). Lakatos used the term research programme to refer to succession of studies to advance central idea or theory (termed the hard core) over time, during which slightly varying versions of it (in the form of auxiliary hypotheses) were evaluated by devising and applying new and evolving research methods. When such programs of study succeeded in building support for the central theory by revealing new and remarkable facts, generating new experimental approaches, and resulting in more precise predictions, they were considered progressive; those programs unable to build support or generate new facts were considered as degenerating. Lakatos's notions were illuminating, but perhaps somewhat removed from the current experience and practical purpose at hand for these researchers. What was needed was definition for what I was calling program of research that could guide these young researchers to conceptualize direction for their work. In limited but effortful search of the literature and World Wide Web, I found only one on Wikipedia that defined research program as a coordinated set of projects undertaking related research, often at national or even international level, with government funding (Research Program, 2009, para. 1). Believing that definition to lack clarity and to impose unnecessary restrictions for my purpose, I devised my own definition, thusly, as an advancing series or cluster of studies under the leadership of scientist or group of scientists that systematically builds knowledge in focal area. …

Guessing the future of the past

I review the book “Making Prehistory: Historical Science and the Scientific Realism Debate” by Derek Turner. Turner suggests that philsophers should take seriously the historical sciences such as geology when considering philosophy of science issues. To that end, he explores the scientific realism debate with the historical sciences in mind. His conclusion is a view allied to that of Arthur Fine: a view Turner calls the natural historical attitude. While I find Turner’s motivations good, I find his characterisation of the historical sciences unconvincing. I say why in a section at the end of the review. The result is that I am unpersuaded by his thesis.

A mudança epistemológica do professor de ciências e biologia

Besides showing teacher development researchers' arguments for the importance of considering the teacher's epistemology when we intend to change his/her teaching conceptions and practice, this article presents a proposal for a module in Philosophy of Science to be included in continuing education courses. The proposal experienced by a group of teachers has proved it to be possible to deal with philosophical issues in an interesting manner, thus allowing teachers to involve themselves in the subject and to start reflecting on some Philosophy of Science issues as well as understanding how their conceptions in this area influence their teaching practice.

Adversity and Advancing Nursing Knowledge

This column reports the theme of adversity addressed in reference to theoretical and metatheoretical considerations for advancing nursing knowledge. The development and content of three classic nursing theories are presented by Neuman representatives, and by theorists King and Roy. Topics for continued dialogue are identified as derived from the interface between philosophy of science issues and these theories.

Des contradictions dans la perception du système mondial

Emphasizing divergences in the perception of the main characteristics of the world System, this paper concentrates on five main issues: 1) whether the System is getting more integrated or more disintegrated; 2) whether ideology is coming to an end or coming back ; 3) whether the System is multipolar or bipolar ; 4) what are the bases of different poles ; and 5) what help social theory can offer to find the "right" answer. Quantitative data are presented to support the different contentions. The paper's thesis is that even the available data are interpreted differently by different researchers, and this shows the primacy of epistemology, the researchers' basic premises, and the importance of relating the analysis of international relations to issues in philosophy of science.

Laws, Symmetry, and Symmetry Breaking: Invariance, Conservation Principles, and Objectivity

Given its importance in modern physics, philosophers of science have paid surprisingly little attention to the subject of symmetries and invariances, and they have largely neglected the subtopic of symmetry breaking. I illustrate how the topic of laws and symmetries brings into fruitful interaction technical issues in physics and mathematics with both methodological issues in philosophy of science, such as the status of laws of physics, and metaphysical issues, such as the nature of objectivity.

Why Gender Is a Relevant Factor in the Social Epistemology of Scientific Inquiry

In recent years, feminist philosophy of science has been subjected to criticism. The debate has focused on the implications of the underdetermination thesis for accounts of the role of social values in scientific reasoning. My aim here is to offer a different approach. I suggest that feminist philosophers of science contribute to our understanding of science by (1) producing gender-sensitive analyses of the social dimensions of scientific inquiry and (2) examining the relevance of these analyses for normative issues in philosophy of science.