Reading 1.1 The Philosophy of science and research methodology
1. Inductivism (歸納法) and falsificatism (證偽法)
Inductivism
Science method is based on some variant of induction. – naïve inductivism which
bases all scientific reasoning upon observation (觀察).
The Route from observation to explanation
Figure 1
Facts acquired through
Universal laws
Predictions
Observation
and theories
and explanation
Inductive processes
2.
Deductive processes
Induction (歸納法)
Observation – it enable the observer to produce singular statements which,
-
by a process of generalization (觀察物件掉在地下),
-
lead to the production of universal statements (地心吸引力),
-
which may be elevated to theories and laws (牛頓萬有引力)after
a large number of similar observations.
Deduction (演繹法)
By combination the results of observations; theories(原理) need to be able to
predict or explain features of the environment.
The discipline of logic(邏輯) is required to progress from observation based
theories to the prediction or explanation of phenomena.
Logical deduction 邏輯演繹 is based on the if....then progressive from
“Premises” (前提) to logical deduction.
Naïve inductivism
Naïve inductivist bases the development of science upon the aggregation of
observed data into laws and theories.
Basis of science – Observation and induction reasoning are objective and the
result will be objective laws and theories.
Premises – The validity of the conclusion depends on the premises, since it is
possible to derive logically sound conclusions, which are false because the
premise is incorrect.
Reading 1.1 The Philosophy of science and research methodology
Justified – the principle of induction
Difficulties associated with the employment of observation as the basis of
scientific method and the development of scientific knowledge – how can the
principle of induction are justified?
Examining the induction principle by appealing
Appeal to logic – Based on the induction-deduction principle that a secure
foundation can be built by multiple and varied observation leading from
singular observations to universal statements - The logic of moving from the
specific to general !
Appeal to experience – A universal statement asserting the validity of the
principle is here inferred from a number of singular statements recording past
successful application of the principle.
Other objection to induction as a basis of science is the theory dependent
nature of observation.
a. Some form of theoretical basis is required to know what to observe – to
derive on appropriate mechanism for carrying out observation.
b. It is related to the manner in which the observer interprets what is “seen”
or observe by his or her faculties.
c. Science does not begin with observation statements since theory precedes
them.
d. Observation statements are fallible and not always provide a firm basis for
scientific knowledge.
However, the induction- deduction principle derived from observation has
proved valid in accounting theory construction by researcher. Deductive
reasoning entails a valid argument in which it is impossible to assert the
premises and to deny the conclusion without contradicting oneself.
Reading 1.1 - Falsification and Karl Popper
Falisficationism is based on a different view of the process of theory derivation from
that of the naïve inductivism.
Falsifiability – there is logical support for the falsificationist position because, while
we have seen that there are problems in trying to move from observation statement
to universal laws, the falsity of universal statements can be deducted from suitable
singular statements.
All inductinve evidence is limited, as we do not observe the universe at all times and
in all places.
We are not justified therefore in making a general rule from this
observation of particulars.
Popper gives the examples: Europeans for thousands of years had observed millions
of white swans. Using inductive evidence, we could come up with the theory that all
swans are white. However, exploration of Australasian introduced Europeans to
black swans.
Popper’s point is this: no matter how many observations are made which confirm a
theory there is always the possibility that a future observation could refute it.
Induction cannot yield certainty.
Falsification – to justify the inductive evidence
Popper proposed an alternative scientific method based on falsification. He denied
the inductive evidence and adopted the deductive logic and applied to falsification.
The deduction logic is -: However many confirming instances there are for a theory,
it only takes one counter observation to falsify it: only one black swan is needed to
repudiate the theory that all swans are white.
Science progresses when a theory is shown to be wrong and a new theory is
introduced which better explains the phenomena. For Popper the scientist should
attempt to disprove his/her theory rather than attempt to continually prove it.
Popper does think that science can help us progressively approach the truth but we
can never be certain that we have the final explanation
Reading 1.1
Scientific Method
Scientific method - The application of the philosophy of science to accounting
We learn that there are approach - i.e. Philosophical approaches to science (e.g.
Induction, Deduction and falsification) and theories about the way in which research
progresses i.e. Methodological (Lakatos and Kuhn).
Lakatos – Research Program made up of three components - the negative heuristic,
the protective belt and positive heuristic.
Khun – the progression of science – Paradigm shift
-
the Disciplinary Matrix
1. Symbolic generalizations – accepted notions such as double entry, concept of
income.
2. Shared commitments – the realization and matching principles, going concern.
3. Shared values – conservatism, consistency and materiality.
4. Exemplars – textbooks and expositions in current use
These philosophies and theories underlie the accepted approach to empirical
research which is often called the scientific method. It is a highly structured
approach to theory formulation.
Scientific Methods
The progress of scientific methodsa.
Start with a theory based on prior knowledge or accepted ‘scientific ‘ theory
constructions.
b.
The next step is to use the theory to establish a research problem when we
observe real-world behavior that does not concur with the theory.
c.
At this stage, a theory is developed to explain the observed behavior and use
the theory to generate testable hypotheses that will be corroborated only if the
theory holds.
d.
Then follow precise and highly structured or predetermined procedures for data
collection and after subjecting the data to math. or statistical techniques, we
validate or refute the hypotheses tested.
e.
This approach has further inherent assumptions that see the world to be
researched as an objective reality capable of examination in terms of large
scale or average statistics.