UD1b: Epistemology of science

La breve storia della teoria atomica presentata dall’insegnante e’ secondo te un
resoconto ‘oggettivo’ oppure una rappresentazione ‘faziosa’ dettata dal suo
theoretical framework?
o What is your theoretical framework, that is your perspective, your point of
view when you try to explain natural phenomena? Do you think that science
can objectively describe natural phenomena? According to your theoretical
famework, is the scientific point of view just a point of view as any others?
Is it different?
In group of four, please, read page 885 of the paper ‘The postmodern assault on
science’ by Kuntz, M. (2012) in EMBO reports, 13 (10), 885-889 and answer the
following questions.
You find in brackets the answers given by the teacher. Please, do not take these
answers for granted and be free to challenge them.
1. According to Kuntz what is threatening the foundation of the scientific
approach?
[the postmodernist thought]
2. In your view, does the author think that scientific knowledge is objective?
[Yes, because he maintains that science guarantees access to objective
realities through observation, measurement and experimentation ]
3. What do you think Kuntz means with the words ‘the Enlightenment project’?
[the Enlightenment project postulates the existence of a real world
attainable as an objective truth]
4. Who are, according to Kuntz, the three thinkers responsible for deconstructing
the Enlightenment project?
[Nietzsche, Feyerabend and Kuhn]
5. Why does Kuntz think that in a way Nietzsche is undermining science?
[Because according to Kuntz science aims at objectivity while Nietzsche
questions our ability to discern objective truth]
6. Why does Kuntz think that in a way Feyerabend is undermining science?
[Feyerabend argues that the idea of science as a system of knowledge
production provided with universal methodological rules is not real.
Rather science is characterised by a sort of epistemological anarchy
where ‘anything goes’]
7. What does the word epistemological mean?
[An epistemological issue concerns the question of what is or what
should be regarded as acceptable knowledge]
8. What does epistemology mean?
[Epistemology is the theory of knowledge. It questions what knowledge
is and how it can be acquired (from Greek epistēmē, meaning
knowledge, understanding, and logos, meaning "study of"). The typical
questions asked in epistemology are: What can we know? How can we
know it?]
9. What do we mean by epistemology of science?
[The epistemology of science is the theory of scientific methodologies.
Namely, it is the theory that tries to understand what the scientific
knowledge is and how we can acquire it. The typical questions asked in
epistemology are: Why do we consider a statement , but not others, as
scientific? How do we acquire scientific knowledge? Is scientific
knowledge possible? Can scientific knowledge be certain? How can we
differentiate truth from falsehood? Why do we believe in certain claims
and not others?]
10. Why Kuhn is seen as undermining the pretention that science understands
reality?
[Because in his view science is not a gradual process of accumulation of
knowledge. Rather, it is periodically subject to a paradigm shift which
overwhelms outdated theories]
11. Why ‘Strong sociology’ is seen as undermining the pretention that science
understands reality?
[Because from the Strong sociology point of view both accepted and non
accepted scientific ‘theories’ should be treated equally. In fact, both of
them are the product of social human activities, such as the allegiance
to a shared paradigm that is necessary to be accepted in a scientific
community]
12. Why the thinkers Bruno Latour and Ian Hacking are labelled by Kuntz as
deconstructionists?
[Because Bruno Latour and Ian Hacking see the scientific claims as
expressions of a culture among others. In other words, the scientific
claims are considered social constructions with political connotations
and agendas as well. As a consequence, according to Bruno Latour and
Ian Hacking, science is not an objective account of natural phenomena.
Rather, it is a possible interpretation of the natural phenomena]