Theory of Knowledge - Course Companion for Students Marija Uzunova Dang Arvin Singh Uzunov Dang

ayodelepearce1
from ayodelepearce1 More from this publisher
21.11.2022 Views

there are significant problems withWhileas a demarcation criterion, itfalsificationas important as ever to be able to tell theremainsbetween science and pseudo-science.differencecan do this activity working on your own,Youa partner or in a small group. See if youwithmap out science, drawing its boundarycanother domains of knowledge, suchwithculture, religion and politics. If you areaswith others, each of you should makeworkingown map. Then consider the followingyourquestions.Where does science overlap with the other1.domains?2. What happens in the overlapping zones?Where is the boundary particularly clear,3.dotted or blurry? Describe whatwiggly,means and why you have drawn oritit this way.imaginedyou are doing this exercise with a partnerIfin a group, compare your maps and shareoryou identify as significant similarities andwhatbetween them.differencesthat you drew a map in the exerciseSupposingwhere science is distinct from other waysaboveunderstanding the world. Consider: how isofknowledge different from other typesscientificknowledge? Brainstorm a few claims youofmake as answers to this question. Keepcanmind that your claim should be somethingincan be disputed and argued with. Anthatwould be, “Scientific knowledge isexamplereliable as compared with other types ofmoresuch as knowledge from personalknowledge,experience”.else could we distinguish the methodology,Howand body of knowledge of science? Whyhistoryscience’s account of reality so often givenisauthority than other accounts?greaterIn your understanding, what makes4.knowledge different from otherscientificHow would you describe the relationship5.science and the unknown?betweenour map of science may look like,Whateverare always scientists working at the edgetherethat map, pushing the frontier. The 2018of“The Most Unknown” introducesdocumentaryto nine frontier scientists from differentusfields.terms: Cheney TheSearchUnknownMostIs there something that makes all of the6.activities and inquiries in thedifferentWhat did you notice about the ability of7.to talk about and understand eachscientistsHow would you describe the scientists’8.towards knowing and notattitudesone of those claims, construct anChoosingin favour of your claim. For theargumentabove, a supporting argumentclaimsay that the reliability of scientificmightis due to the methods used toknowledgeit. produceyour claim and argument with a partner.Shareconsider how you might improveTogether,claims and arguments, and what are theyourof a good argument.characteristicsI. ScopeI. ScopeFor discussion and reflectionHow would you map out the scope oftypes of knowledge?the natural sciences?documentary “science”?other’s work?knowing?Next, consider the following questions.Practising skills: Constructing arguments169

II. Perspectivessection explores the rich and varied roleThisperspective in the natural sciences. There areofperspectives about how science changesdifferenttime, and how it came to be what it is today.overhow scientists manage disagreements, and•they tend to disagree aboutwhathow experts and non-experts engage in•controversies about sciencepubliccritiques coming from perspectives on•that have a history of being excludedscienceknowledge has been instrumentalScientificenabling humanity, for better or worse,indominate the planet. It has been said thattois power. But what kind of powerknowledgeit? To look more closely at this, we turnisthe views of Francis Bacon, who is oftentocredited as having first said the wordswronglyis power”. Although he did not“knowledgethat word for word, it is likely he agreedsayit. withBacon was an influential statesman andFrancisin the 17th century who championedscholaruse of experimentation as a way to gaintheabout the world. Specifically, heknowledgethat scientific knowledge shouldemphasizedgained through empirical observation ofbein a systematic method that involvednature,scientists “exploring nature forscepticaltruths”. Bacon was fond of metaphorshiddenoften described the natural world inandterms, portraying masculinegenderedbravely venturing out and extractingscientiststruths “locked in nature’s bosom”. Thesethehave come under criticism fromwritingsobservers in recent years (see II.7 onsomecritiques of science). He also arguedfeministcalled “armchair theorizing”—that hadbewidespread in Western scholarship sincebeentime. His ideas are widely acceptedAristotle’shaving contributed to the developmentasthe scientific methodologies, and to theofof methodical systems ofdevelopment7.1 Titl pag for Novum Organum Sintiarum, 1645, byFigureBaon (1561–1626)Franismetaphors indicated on the title page of hisTheNovum Organum Scientiarum are significantwork7I I . P E R S P E C T I V E SZooming in, this section looks at:categorizing knowledge.from the scientific practice and discourse.II.1 Is knowledge power?against the use of conjecture—what mightand revealing (Figure 7.1). The page shows the170

II. Perspectives

section explores the rich and varied role

This

perspective in the natural sciences. There are

of

perspectives about how science changes

different

time, and how it came to be what it is today.

over

how scientists manage disagreements, and

they tend to disagree about

what

how experts and non-experts engage in

controversies about science

public

critiques coming from perspectives on

that have a history of being excluded

science

knowledge has been instrumental

Scientific

enabling humanity, for better or worse,

in

dominate the planet. It has been said that

to

is power. But what kind of power

knowledge

it? To look more closely at this, we turn

is

the views of Francis Bacon, who is often

to

credited as having first said the words

wrongly

is power”. Although he did not

“knowledge

that word for word, it is likely he agreed

say

it. with

Bacon was an influential statesman and

Francis

in the 17th century who championed

scholar

use of experimentation as a way to gain

the

about the world. Specifically, he

knowledge

that scientific knowledge should

emphasized

gained through empirical observation of

be

in a systematic method that involved

nature,

scientists “exploring nature for

sceptical

truths”. Bacon was fond of metaphors

hidden

often described the natural world in

and

terms, portraying masculine

gendered

bravely venturing out and extracting

scientists

truths “locked in nature’s bosom”. These

the

have come under criticism from

writings

observers in recent years (see II.7 on

some

critiques of science). He also argued

feminist

called “armchair theorizing”—that had

be

widespread in Western scholarship since

been

time. His ideas are widely accepted

Aristotle’s

having contributed to the development

as

the scientific methodologies, and to the

of

of methodical systems of

development

7.1 Titl pag for Novum Organum Sintiarum, 1645, by

Figure

Baon (1561–1626)

Franis

metaphors indicated on the title page of his

The

Novum Organum Scientiarum are significant

work

7

I I . P E R S P E C T I V E S

Zooming in, this section looks at:

categorizing knowledge.

from the scientific practice and discourse.

II.1 Is knowledge power?

against the use of conjecture—what might

and revealing (Figure 7.1). The page shows the

170

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!