Facts are needed to establish theories but theories are needed to make sense of facts

Get Started. It's Free
or sign up with your email address
Facts are needed to establish theories but theories are needed to make sense of facts by Mind Map: Facts are needed to establish theories but theories are needed to make sense of facts

1. Isomorphisim

2. Facts and theory at the same time?

2.1. Yes - Gravity can be observed and is also a theory. Gravitational theory explains why and how things fall into the ground

3. What are facts?

3.1. They compose theories

3.2. Sentences of idealized theories

3.3. Collection of data

3.4. Term 'fact' can be vague and can refer to data, collection of data or even theories (Quote from article)

3.5. Eg of facts: Tomorrow it will rain. - Not a theory because it cannot be proven wrong since the weather will not change.

4. Introduction

5. To what extent can theories be created by facts based on emotion?

5.1. Eg. I love my parents/ I love ice cream - It is a statement/fact and is not a theory because it cannot be falsified (therefore is not a scientific theory however it links to the human sciences theories).

5.2. Facts in human sciences are often based on human beings who are driven by emotion

6. The consensus theory of truth

7. Different ways of creating theories

7.1. Baconian method

7.1.1. Generalization through observation (inductive reasoning)

7.2. Newton method

7.2.1. Hypothesis based on explicit and implicit nature of method and reasoning through observation

8. 2nd KQ: How reliable is inductive reasoning when formulating theories in human sciences and natural sciences?

8.1. David Hume

8.2. Assumes causality

8.3. Hypothesis are created from inductive reasoning can be expanded and information added

8.4. About observing overall PATTERN to guide towards truth

8.5. COUNTER CLAIM: Can weaken the argument since it can give evidence that go against prediction

8.6. COUNTER CLAIM: Goodman's theory - finite sequence of events or observations can always conform different patterns (which means the same facts can conform different theories which leaves us questioning the veracity of theories)

9. To what extent does empirical knowledge  play a roll when creating theories and stating facts?

9.1. Empirical knowledge is knowledge gained personally, by experiencing it for ourselves – usually through our senses. It is sometimes termed a posteriori knowledge, meaning after experience.

9.2. We create theories ourselves through different experiences that we have. E.G. Child may be scared of dogs because in the past she saw a dog bitting someone who tried to approach him, so we theorize that dogs will attack us.

9.3. Acquaintance - knowledge from personal experiene

9.4. Russel: Knowledge by description - being told by others

10. How reliable are theories in Human sciences?

10.1. Hawthorne effect

10.1.1. Study done into the Hawthorne Electrical Works in Chicago in the 1920s,

10.1.2. Phenomenon of human subjects behaving differently due to being studied by investigators.

11. Opinions?

11.1. Judgements, Evaluations

11.1.1. Cant falsify it. If you can falsify then its a theory. eg. Apples taste good

11.1.2. Not a fact

11.2. Can be BASED on facts and theories

11.2.1. Should be given higher priority and should be given higher importance

11.3. Elwyn brooks white: "Prejudice is a great time saver, you can form opinions without having to get facts'

12. What are theories?

12.1. Way of organizing facts - in order to make sense of it

12.2. Collection of facts

12.3. Connected by formal inference

12.4. Can be falsified

12.5. Expressions of human thought - imagination

12.6. thoughts of scientists trying to understand the causes of some set of phenomena.

12.7. Predict behaviour

12.8. Explanation of facts

12.9. theory» refers, not to idealized statements that we regard as facts, but to hypotheses that we might want to test

12.10. Ex. Objects fall from the groung - fact. Theory of gravitation

12.11. Theories are descriptions of sentences that we have chosen to call «facts,»

12.12. Instrumentalism

12.12.1. theories are tools or instruments identifying reliable means-end relations found in experience, but not claiming to reveal realities beyond experience COUNTER ARGUMENT: instrumentalism is unable to account for the importance to pure science of testing severely even the most remote implications of its theories, since it is unable to account for the pure scientist's interest in truth and falsity.

12.12.2. premise 1: Theories are tools-of-the-trade of thinking, seeking to map means-ends relationships found in experience.

12.12.3. premise 2: Theories predict consequences of using means to achieve ends. COUNTER ARGUMENT - POPPER Limited capacity to generate logically true theories Popper rejected inductive reasoning in favor of deductive reasoning Deduction can move from a self-evident universal statement, such as "All men are mortal", to true singular statements that every individual human is mortal, because the universal statement already embraces all singulars. But there can be no principle by which a singular statement can justify a universal, because no singular statement can report observing "all" of any kind. He argued that deduction could serve modern science, not by assuming general statements to be true, but by providing general statements testable by their consequences. Falsification "works" when experience contradicts a theory's predictions: "it must be possible for an empirical scientific system to be refuted by experience."

12.12.4. premise 3: Theory-development requires inductive reasoning, basing general statements on limited observations of facts-of-the-case.

12.12.5. premise 4: There are no realities behind or beyond what can be known by applying instrumental theories. POPPER rejected premise 4 because it denies the distinction between pure and applied science. He granted that science might apply empirical or instrumental theories, but asserted that epistemological or reality-based theories, revealing truths independently of experience, are equally valid. pure sciences such as mathematics and logic can make true statements without observing facts-of-the-case. true theories don't require establishing facts-of-the-case; they can be conjectural myths, derived from inspiration or chance, which are "... psychologically or genetically a priori, i.e., prior to all observational experience." They can also precede observation or recognition of similarities and differences

12.12.6. Instrumentalists claim that "truth" is always situational, they forfeit their capacity to explain sciences in which the instrumental criterion of judgment cannot be applied.

12.12.7. Also called pragmatism"."experimentalism", and "instrumentalism

13. Human Sciences

13.1. Study behavioral traits shaped by environment and genes

13.2. IQ tests as measuring intelligence?

13.3. Friedman's use of instrumentalism in Economics

13.3.1. Defined economics as: a system of generalizations or conjectures that can be used to make correct predictions about the consequences of any change in circumstances.

13.3.2. Rejected premise 4: the relevant question to ask about the "assumptions" of a theory is not whether they are descriptively "realistic", for they never are, but whether they are sufficiently good approximations for the purpose in hand. And this question can be answered only seeing whether the theory works, which means whether it yields sufficiently accurate predictions. COUNTER ARGUMENT LAWRENCE BOLAND So long as a theory does its intended job there is no need to consider the truth of its assumptions. ... This view of the role of theories is called "instrumentalism". It says that theories are convenient and useful ways of (logically) generating what have turned out to be true (or successful) predictions or conclusions

13.3.3. Truly important and significant hypotheses will be found to have "assumptions" that are wildly inaccurate descriptive representations of reality, and, in general, the more significant the theory, the more unrealistic the assumptions ...[8]:14

14. First KQ: What can be considered a scientific fact ?

14.1. Impossible to know because it is subjective and changing.

15. To what extent Is scientific methodology when formulating scientific theories reliable?

15.1. Can be misleading

15.2. Correlation does not equal causation

15.2.1. Unlike causation, correlation suggests that two events or phenomena are linked only because they both share a third factor, or simply because they have happened at the same or similar time.

15.2.2. The causation of a phenomenon is what directly makes it occur.

15.3. Deduction

15.3.1. form of reasoning in which you go from a general rule to a specific rule.

15.4. A logical fallacy

15.4.1. idea or assertion that uses flawed reasoning to arrive at its conclusion. Fallacies may occur by accident, or be used by people deliberately to persuade others of the dubious truth of what they are saying.

15.5. Value bias

15.5.1. The hypothetico deductive method requires observation, formulation of hypothesis, and application of research tools, at each of these stages there is a significant potential for value biases (ie what do you choose to observe ? what do you choose to formulate as hypotheses ? which research tools do you apply ? how do you interpret your results ? – all are subject to individual biases.

15.6. Superseded or absolete theory

15.6.1. a scientific theory that was once widely accepted within the scientific community but is no longer considered to be an adequate or complete description of reality, or is considered to be simply false.

15.7. Fringe science

15.7.1. an investigation based on mainstream theories in a specific field and is considered to be questionable by the mainstream.

15.7.2. highly speculative

15.7.3. often advanced by people with no traditional academic science background, or by researchers outside the mainstream discipline

15.8. Pathological science

15.8.1. Irving Langmuir,

15.8.2. area of research where "people are tricked into false results ... by subjective effects, wishful thinking or threshold interactions."

15.8.3. Extrasensory perception

15.8.4. Martian canal (turned out to be optical illusions)

15.8.5. Flying saucer (E.T.) theory

16. Natural Science

16.1. Goal: Explain the phenomena of the natural world in a objective and unbias matter.

16.1.1. People perceive and interprete reality different and to reach an objective description we need to use standardize proceders for gaining further knowledge of the world. Scientific method tries to eliminate subjective influences and sets standard on how further knowledge should be gained Observation - car doesnt work Hypothesis (educated guess, there needs to be good reasoning) - miss gasoline? broken part? No because I fueled my car yesterday, No, because there are no sound, therefore it may be the battery Experiment - testing the hypothesis. It will prove it right or wrong Conclusion: Battery was the problem indeed. So the next time your car doesnt work the problem is the battery = creation of a theory Repeat steps of the scientific method to prove theory Problem with scientific method Over generalization Cyclical process - we keep on testing and retesting and when is falsified we look for a better theory. Scientific method is an agreement on how further knowledge in gained. It is a structure problem solving approach but not a scientific theory itself. Cant use scientific method to prove scientific method. Albert Einstein: ' When the number of factors coming into play in a phenomenological complex is too large, scientific method in most cases fails. one need only think of the wether even for a few days ahead is impossible'  - eg of when scientific method cant be applied Falsification If theory fails to make correct predictions one needs to reject it Scientific theories cannot give you certainty because theories can be proven wrong (falsified) Doesnt matter how many times a theory has been proved right, there will always be a chance that in the future it will be falsified Metatheory Any physical theory is always provisional, in the sense that it is only a hypothesis; you can never prove it. Theories are descriptions of sentences that we have chosen to call «facts,» Come from observation -> hypothesis -> experiment -> fact

16.1.2. Scientific theory Demands creation of reality equally accessible to all observers

17. The paradigma of reference of disciplines may no be congruent

17.1. When researchers, or thinkers, are developing ideas (& knowledge) within their discipline they may be using quite different frameworks (or modes of thought). The aims of the research may not be congruent. For example, biologists and psychologists studying the same behaviour may assume very different causes, their frame of reference is different.

18. Language

18.1. the method of human communication