Due May 10, 2020, 11:55 PM Assignment Instructions
Due May 10 2020 1155 Pmassignment Instructionswe Will Be Usingdipit
Assignment Instructions We will be using Dipity by Timetoast to create these timelines. Create an account and set the privacy so that your timeline is shared publicly, otherwise your instructor cannot see it. Also, make sure that after your timeline is completed the URL does not indicate that it is still in edit mode. Submit the URL to the assignment text box. Your timeline should be on one of the new philosophers listed below and you should have at least four entries.
Time toast has a limit of 500k (characters) per entry. The total word count for all of the entries on your timeline should be words. Include a link to a short educational YouTube video in one of the entries. If your entry descriptions are longer than 500k you may copy and paste them into the Assignment text box. See the detailed instructions and tips below.
Dipity Online Timeline made with Timetoast's free interactive timeline making software. > Timetoast Student Tutorial This screencast demonstrates how students can create a timeline using the website timetoast.com. Each entry should contain the following elements: A title indicating the name of the scientist/philosopher who is being examined and his/her approximate birth/death dates. An accurate date for the key event/moment in the philosopher's work on which the entry focuses. A summary of the philosopher's contribution to the philosophy of science in words total over the space of four or more entries. If you write more and are unable to fit it into the boxes of your timeline, you can copy and paste it into the Assignments text box here.
Dates and MLA citations for his or her major works. At least one video, sound file, or image that illustrates the concepts for which the philosopher is best known. Note: While a portrait of the philosopher is a nice bonus, it does NOT fulfill this requirement. Each week, a list of names from which you can choose your entries is provided. For Timeline 2, select one of the following: Paul Feyerabend, Thomas Kuhn, Imre Lakatos, Ernest Nagel, Hilary Putnam, W. V. Quine, David Bloor, Donna Haraway, Nancy Cartwright, Alan Chalmers, Daniel Dennett, John Dupré, Noam Chomsky, Bas van Fraassen, Ian Hacking, Sandra Heller, Larry Laudan, Helen Longino, John Polkinghorne.
Paper For Above instruction
Introduction
The philosophy of science has been shaped by numerous influential thinkers whose ideas have revolutionized our understanding of scientific methodology, paradigms, and epistemology. Creating a timeline for the key contributions of these philosophers allows us to appreciate the evolution of scientific philosophy. This essay will focus on four prominent philosophers: Thomas Kuhn, Karl Popper, Imre Lakatos, and Paul Feyerabend, highlighting their main ideas, significant works, and their impact on science and philosophy.
Thomas Kuhn: Paradigm Shifts
Thomas Kuhn (1922-1996) was a monumental figure in the philosophy of science, best known for his book, "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions," published in 1962. Kuhn challenged the traditional view of scientific progress as a linear accumulation of facts. Instead, he introduced the concept of paradigms—comprehensive frameworks that guide research and experimentation within specific scientific communities. His work delineated how scientific revolutions occur when anomalies accumulate, leading to paradigm shifts.
One of Kuhn’s key moments was his 1962 publication, which redefined how scientists and philosophers view scientific progress. He explained that science operates within paradigms until contradictions arise, prompting revolutionary shifts to new paradigms. This concept emphasizes that scientific knowledge is not merely objective but also influenced by social and psychological factors.
To illustrate his ideas, consider the Copernican revolution, where the geocentric model was replaced with the heliocentric model, representing a paradigm shift. The influence of Kuhn’s theory extended beyond philosophy, impacting science education and research methodologies.
Major works: Kuhn, T. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. University of Chicago Press.
See this brief educational video on Kuhn's paradigm shifts: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rt0WCS3EcGY
Karl Popper: Falsifiability
Karl Popper (1902-1994) revolutionized scientific methodology with his criterion of falsifiability. In his 1934 work, "The Logic of Scientific Discovery," Popper argued that scientific theories must be testable and refutable. Unlike verificationism, which seeks to confirm hypotheses, falsifiability focuses on the possibility of falsification, making it a crucial demarcation between science and non-science.
Popper’s idea was that scientific progress occurs through conjectures and refutations. Theories are proposed, tested, and discarded if proven false, fostering a dynamic and self-correcting scientific process. This approach emphasized critical scrutiny and the provisional nature of scientific knowledge.
A notable example is Einstein’s theory of general relativity, which made bold predictions that could be tested and potentially falsified. Popper's influence extended to scientific methodology, emphasizing the importance of rigorous hypothesis testing.
Major works: Popper, K. (1959). The Logic of Scientific Discovery. Routledge.
Watch this summary on Popper’s falsifiability: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JkK8gX5KOWg
Imre Lakatos: Scientific Research Programmes
Imre Lakatos (1922-1974) extended Popper's falsification concept into the methodology of scientific research programmes. His 1978 work, "The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes," proposed that science progresses not just through falsification but via competing research programmes that evolve over time.
He distinguished between progressive and degenerative research programmes, emphasizing that scientists work within theoretical frameworks that are supplemented or replaced as new data emerges. Lakatos aimed to reconcile Kuhn’s paradigm shifts with Popper’s falsification, proposing a more nuanced view of scientific development.
His analysis provided a pragmatic approach, acknowledging the complexity of scientific change, including research that adapts to new evidence without abandoning the core framework prematurely.
Major works: Lakatos, I. (1978). The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes. Cambridge University Press.
Watch this introduction to Lakatos’s philosophy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6j1RC9v7IG4
Paul Feyerabend: Epistemological Anarchism
Paul Feyerabend (1924-1994) challenged the notion of scientific method as a rigid, uniform process. His 1975 book, "Against Method," argued that scientific progress can occur through diverse, even anarchistic methods, advocating for epistemological anarchism.
Feyerabend believed that scientific theories are influenced by social, historical, and cultural factors, making rigid methodological rules impractical and restrictive. His famous adage, "Anything goes," encapsulated his view that scientific progress is often non-linear and unpredictable.
His critique highlights the diversity of scientific practices and the importance of methodological pluralism. While controversial, Feyerabend’s ideas emphasize that scientific advancement is complex and cannot be confined to strict rules.
Major works: Feyerabend, P. (1975). Against Method. Verso.
Learn more about Feyerabend's views here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwrL0wqwEKM
Conclusion
The evolution of the philosophy of science is marked by dynamic debates and revolutionary ideas. Kuhn’s paradigm shifts, Popper’s falsifiability, Lakatos’s research programmes, and Feyerabend’s epistemological anarchism each contributed to a richer understanding of scientific change. Understanding their theories helps contextualize contemporary scientific practices and philosophical inquiries, demonstrating that science is a complex, human enterprise influenced by social, psychological, and methodological factors.
References
- Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. University of Chicago Press.
- Popper, K. R. (1959). The Logic of Scientific Discovery. Routledge.
- Lakatos, I. (1978). The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes. Cambridge University Press.
- Feyerabend, P. (1975). Against Method. Verso.
- Chalmers, A. (1999). What Is This Thing Called Science? Indiana University Press.
- Giere, R. N. (2010). Science from Paging to Practice. University of Chicago Press.
- Longino, H. E. (1990). Science as Social Knowledge. Princeton University Press.
- Hacking, I. (1983). Representing and Intervening. Cambridge University Press.
- Nagel, E. (1961). The Structure of Science. Harcourt.
- Quine, W. V. (1960). Word and Object. MIT Press.