Philosophical Psychology Spring 2008
THE LOGIC OF MODERN SCIENCE J.R. KANTOR
CHAPTER 1: SCIENCE: NATURE AND GOAL What is Science? (p. 3) • To understand what science is we must take an observational approach to how scientists examine specific situations, analyze the scientific problem and the event that it originated from, as well as the method and instruments for solving that problem. Science does not seek to find universal and absolute laws. In other words, no scientist actually works on the basis of universal principles. Scientists work within definite bounds and have no place in the limitless or infinity. o Science does not seek out universal laws or absolute laws. Science is also not an absolute method. To make this assumption is to generalize the scientific method until it becomes abstract and absolute. o Sciences have other aspects besides method. It has its philosophy, it’s applied domain, it’s assumptions, etc. o There are many different scientific methods. The term science refers to much more particular and limited situations than conventional descriptions afford. What science is can only be determined on the basis of the unique activities involved in determining what kinds of activities are involved in: (a) the existence or nonexistence of certain things and events and; (b) the characteristics of such things when they do exist. Science then turns out to be an enormous accumulation of specific jobs. Scientific laws are relatively stable however they are subject to change especially as our observational techniques improve. There is a notion that we are heading for a science of everything. However, Kantor says that is never going to happen because science is always changing. Science does not have limitless scope or finality. Check out Zimmeran (70’s) article about the universe as not a scientific subject.
• • • • •
Not Science but Sciences (p. 5) • There is no single science, only series or families of sciences.
Sciences in Relation (p. 5)
Although sciences are unique and specific they are all interrelated. (a) Events often can be analyzed from the perspective of several scientific specializations. In other words, sciences may have overlapping subject matter (e.g. geophysics, biochemistry, etc.) (b) Many sciences use the same methods and techniques and apparatuses (statistics, experimentation, etc.) (c) Cultural unities (cultural presuppositions) influence the focus of scientific work, provide a basis for the common elements and rigidity of schools, and make room for fashions in science, though they also allow for variations. (e.g. the world is orderly, there is a world of reality that we are contacting) i. All scientists must have the assumption that there exists an ontological reality, otherwise what are they studying? ii. All sciences operate on a relatively common foundation of philosophical assumptions (or presuppositions). (d) There is also a cooperative effort among scientists themselves (e.g. almost all the tools used by the astronomer were developed by the physicist). Scientists often study the same things but in different ways. Although interrelations exist no science should be considered basic to another science.
Specifications of Scientific Enterprises (p. 6) • • Scientific work differs only in detail from other forms of activity. The following characteristics describe those details (a) Seriousness. e.g. in the so-called content sciences, problems center about the nature and relations of things and events. The sciences are not organized simply to entertain or give us emotional reactions. The sciences are about enhancing our orientation to the natural world. (b) Originality. Could also be referred to as discovery. Scientific enterprises when compared with nonscientific ones involve a factor of novelty. In its most extreme form, originality of hypothesis and conclusion appears revolutionary and consequently provokes powerful opposition by representatives of the social order or of particular scientific schools. In fact, many important scientific advances were made by those not trained in that specific science. One way to foster novelty is by exposing yourself to other cultural norms. Originality is fostered by freedom from cultural restraint (e.g. we don’t make much progress on stem cell research because of ethical issues). Sciences also tend to be more deliberate than other forms of activity (e.g. prescribed methods, logic, assumptions, etc.). However, different sciences differ in detail.
Analysis of Scientific Enterprises (p. 8)
a detailed basic for his development.
. in addition to investigating their immediate changes. As an organism the scientific worker is an observable object in interrelation with other things. o The scientist is going to see what they were trained to see. Much of scientific work is devoted to recovering the processes whereby present things and events have become what they are. The actual interbehavior of individuals in perceiving and thinking situations can be satisfactorily described and explained as observed events. 13) • • • • The basic work of science consists of so interbehaving with things and events as to increase our knowledge of them. Sometimes what negatively impacts a science is the scientist’s history. his problems and techniques. A large proportion of scientific investigation constitutes the observation and manipulation of evolved and constructed products.
• • • • • •
(2) Scientific Work (p. 9)
Much depends upon our view of the scientist and we must not assume that just because we know the science we must know the scientist. o A scientist may lie about their work to advance their career. and the interpretations of what he observes. o The scientist is a product of their own history. Wherever there is a scientist there is an interbehavioral history–namely. Only by examining and manipulating things and events do we obtain knowledge and control. From these records we attempt to gain information concerning the following features: (1) The scientific worker (2) The work of science (3) Things worked with (4) Tools and instruments (5) Auspices (support) under which enterprises are conducted (6) Products of the work done
(1) The Scientific Worker (p.•
Scientific enterprises can analyzed only by studying the records of how individual workers attack their problems. There is no mind or mental events. The scientific worker operates only through his contact with events.
i. The organization of a thing includes its interrelations with other things resulting in various changes and transformations. because these aims appear to be related to personal or social gain. The more you talk about more elaborate descriptions the more you are involved in explanation. o We control to bend the world. and so on. For Kantor.• • •
There is a difference between knowledge and belief. o Prediction is about huge classes of events. o The only way we can predict that something is going to happen again is by making that event a member of a very large class. Scientific work as the behavior of specific individuals varies according to the scientific situation. o The problem is we usually want to predict in more narrow classes. Description involves putting things in relation to as many things as you can. etc. o Kantor says. the uses new information can serve. scientists come to describe and explain things and become closer to prediction and control. Unfortunately. upon one’s interest in particular aspects. microscopes. o e. All scientific contacts with things have one primary goal—the ascertainment of their nature: their constitution and organization. prediction often involves aims secondary to the basic scientific effort to understand things and events. Direct or immediate contacts with things may be extremely simple or they may involve the use of complicated apparatuses.
• • • • •
. etc. “Unfortunately”. description is to describe an event’s constitution. o From Kantor’s perspective. (a) Direct observation. Basic aims of science are description and explanation. Behavior analysts look to see how organisms interrelates with their environment. ii. The larger the class the more accurate the prediction. o Mathematics is an interesting science because it is the science of relations which makes it connected in a unique way to other sciences. From manipulative contacts. These variations are based upon differences in types of things and events studied. It is characteristic of direct observation that regardless of whether it occurs in the field or in a laboratory the observed object is in no way transformed. Despite all this diversity we may set up four generalized types of scientific procedure. o We predict to prepare ourselves to the world. Explanation for Kantor is more elaborate description. • Typically gaining access to one feature when we measure. such as telescopes. spectographs.g. prediction and control are applied aims. Direct observation involves the naked eye. Measurement is a definite manipulation of the event being measured. its interrelations.
biologists. Such problems however. the more it is concerned with difficult and subtle aspects and relationships. those who are dominated by philosophic tradition
• • • •
. (e. There is no distinction between constructs and events.g. We have to be careful not to confuse our description of events with the events themselves. chemical. color blind). but even the most intense creative activity consists of forming and transforming combinations. because they are treated as distinct people assume that seeing an apple is different than sensing that apple. When observations are difficult. when observers are deficient (e. 16) • The things and events with which the scientist interbehaves have reached staggering proportions. not things upon knowledge. The spurious problem of “reality” and existence of an external world arise from the simple confusion of things with reactions to them. A lot of inference and mathematical calculation is used in this procedure. but it is characteristic of scientific work that the connection is rigidly maintained. he is in closer contact with the things observed than when he uses instruments merely to observe times of transit or changes of color. At one end of the vast range of scientific materials are directly visible objects studied by chemists. This has resulted in problems of reality.
(3) Things Worked With (p. weight. etc. The application of a rule or rod brings the worker closer to things than when arranging them under a microscope. (b) Instrumental observation. which plainly reveals that knowledge depends upon things. The chain connecting the worker and the thing upon which he operates may consist of many links. The production of new combinations of elements is certainly creative behavior. electrical. The most subtle forms of scientific activity (generalizing. and other properties.g. can never arise from the study of the scientist’s work. When the scientist uses instruments to compare things by way of ascertaining their length. geologists. To achieve knowledge and attain exact descriptions and explanation we must improve our contact with events. The more advanced a science. (c) Transforming contacts. The dense continuity of scientific and technological enterprises forbids us to typify scientific materials as exclusively mechanical. genetic engineering) (d) Remote observation. abstracting. analogizing.) are indirect and remote inferential operations. Measurement is a definite form of manipulation. Sciences are primarily distinguished by their subject matters. However. or vital. when relations between things observed and observers vary.•
There are also three forms of indirect or remote observation. and psychologists.
instrumentation covers both behavior and products.
• • •
(5) Scientific Auspices (p. These differences can be summed up by referring to the colossal evolution required to develop the human organism. Moreover. the tool used for measurement created the thing being measured). the other the assumption that the act of observing some thing creates that thing (e. The invention and use of apparatus brings science into context with the technological aspects of culture. grinding.conclude that observations contribute to the existence of observed things. Availability of instruments quickens the development of ideas and theories. 18) • • Because scientific apparatus must be individually suitable for particular investigations. Instruments constitute any means whereby investigation is carried on. Many different types of apparatus must be employed for: (a) general probing and macro-and micro-manipulation (b) for transforming things by cutting. Established authoritative schools may determine. an evolution that includes social and technological growth in addition to biological development. (4) Scientific Tools and Instruments (p. the objective conjoining of factors that sum up to a certain event. but the differences are far greater. they vary widely in pattern and function. Modern industrial societies in particular are extremely favorable to all phases of science.g. There are two problems of creation. One. 22) • Scientific work is widely distributed throughout every complex community. a hypothesis may direct your attention. Particular investigations of varying degrees of expertness are carried on under many different kinds of support. Certainly that is some resemblance between the organization and operation of human and nonhuman machines. Scientific groups often exert more damaging influence than nonscientific organizations. Machines designed for scientific tasks have become so complex as to give rise to the view that the work itself can be practiced by machines. Political and religious entities often have an adverse effect on the sciences. The sheer perpetuation of
. what is worth working at and how the work should be done. macerating and centrifuging (c) for making them appear larger and observationally available Laws and theories might also be considered tools. for instance. For example. There is a direct correlation between the complication of society and the complexity of science.
A product of science could be a better method for studying a science’s subject matter. scientific products are only partially represented by static treatises.
CHAPTER 2: SCIENCE AND THE LOGIC OF SCIENCE Science a Five-Factor System (p. It is never complete. the viewpoints achieved. The work done in research. To represent scientific situations effectively the logician of science organizes a five-factor system. 24) • From the standpoint of social institutions the formalized records of science are the materials of knowledge. These constructions sum up and describe the characteristics of things and events. The sciences.
• • •
Science is always in an informative stage. are cumulative. Other prominent scientific products are the basic attitudes which become part of a society’s heritage. the expertness developed constitute the stock of scientific products. Three of the central factors correspond to the three major phases of a scientific situation: (1) crude data (2) operations (3) products The two flanking factors comprise: (4) the thing and event matrix (5) the cultural sources
. Scientific laws when thoroughly verified are probably the most effective and valuable of all investigative products. But at most. o Individual auspices allow the individual to develop their own research interest without interference from any outside sources o Conventional auspices involve outside sources
(6) Scientific Products (p. This is true not only of descriptions and measurements but of ideas and knowledge.doctrines can be a serious danger to scientific innovation. no less than other aspects of culture. 26) • • Logic is the science of sciences or the science or systems. • Scientific support may be classified as individual and conventional.
o His subject matter is the work of the scientist under the exact conditions in which he carries out his science. The logician of science is interested building systems and the product is the systems built. The logician of science is also interested in whether the scientist’s assumptions are coherent. The logician of science is interested in whether a scientist is being influenced to greatly by his cultural influences. The logician is concerned with the integration of the scientific enterprise and asks: o How consistent with scientific rules are the scientist’s operations? o How do the hypotheses correspond with the data? o How effective are hypotheses in producing results? o How carefully have the data been checked with relevant statistics? o How closely do the interpretations comport with the finds?
• • • • • • •
When the logician of science analyzes a scientific situation or system he is himself engaging in a scientific enterprise. The auspices under which the logician of science operates is also under the influence of cultural influences. The logician of science is also interested in whether the scientist’s systems share principles at a broader level with other sciences. Logicians of science are interested in the use of scientific terms.
Protopostulates. • One task of the logician of science is to prevent the use of a faulty metasystem. 28) • Scientific work always involves a set of underlying assumptions and when organized these assumptions form a metasystem
The Minimal Design for an Ideal Scientific System I. More definite assumptions. Scientific Metasystems (p.•
For scientists things and events serve as the criteria for correcting errors and leading to valid systems (i.e.
II. explanations For example. 28) A. Philosophical presuppositions b. Criteria i. Observation. Protopostulates i.
. calculation e. Event Selection d. I. Units i. equations. he himself is subject to the presuppositions derived from his particular cultural background. To get around this potential problem we must reject any absolute standard. Data. Metasystem a. if we are talking about behavior analysis the metasystem is psychology and the protosystem is science in general. System assumptions Scientific Systems a. that mathematics has an absolute validity and controls experience. Isolation and location of domain b.g. Investigating Operations i. including his motivations. Product Construction i. They indicate an awareness of background issues. Criteria. that there is such a things as utter logical rigor. However. theories. Therefore.Includes the scientists general philosophical assumptions. Definitions i. that conclusions can be drawn endowed with inescapable necessity. Relevant assumptions c. mensuration. if the event occurrence does not match a hypothesis the hypothesis must be wrong) The problem is that cultural institutions influence the scientist’s way of thinking. Postulates i. it is the job of the logician of science to estimate the relative proportion of findings the scientist derives from cultural and from event sources
Systems and Metasystems in Science (p. the idea that thought is the measure of all things. Laws. Variables. B. e.
The objective logician differentiates between pristine and transformed things. Scientific laws are simply generalizations formulated from direct observation. Data. Data problems are crucial for systematics. e. e.e.e. Scientific Systems (p. whether a single research or a class of investigations. even abstruse. definitions refer either to things and events or to concepts and terms. what is a function. variables. rate. Depending upon the type of metasystem. ii. • A scientific situation reveals only events on the one hand and the activity of the scientist on the other.g. iii. no ultimate division between description (i. Definitions. Somewhat more remote operations require treatment by analogies and models.II. 30) • The basic divisions of a system we are now to consider provide a model of a typical scientific job. Operants. i. Theory and law construction. observation) and explanation (i. i.
. are always derived from the worker’s direct or indirect contacts with events. ii. D. Even in a long chain of connected interpretations intervenes between original events and the final construction. what is behavior. Investigative Operations. Interbehavioral postulates lead to the view that scientific equations and formulae. duration. The scientific system is rounded out by the creation of formulae. units. ii. C. B. Description and Explanation • It has long been the tradition to differentiate sharply between descriptive and explanatory propositions and laws. what is a stimulus. and must therefore be verifiable in terms of the later. The most obvious type of data construction is the selection and isolation of things from their ordinary background in order to facilitate observation. etc. It is legitimate to state that the goal of the enterprise is to attain these products. e. etc. Rejecting spiritistic metasystems the logician looks upon variables as factors abstracted from data or from operations upon them. a. No hypothesis can be constructed without prior contact with events. All scientific work implies postulates. even though they are not formally set out. They serve to clarify the character of scientific enterprises.g. though abstract. frequency. IOA E.g. Pristine data are best illustrated by accidentally discovered things. however. Organism’s are born with some innate response (reflexes). ii.
A. classes. i. the theory or law still functions as a description of events. response latency.g. equations or principles. Assumptions relevant to the subject matter. law) is justifiable from the standpoint of actual investigation. iii. i. e. Transformed data are the numerous synthetic compounds the chemist produces from simpler compounds and elements. Scientific definitions are constructs developed for the purpose of isolating and locating a domain of work. • The belief is that explanation somehow transcends events. i. Postulates.
the logician of science is concerned with the properties of already known things and with the discovery of new events. rational laws as partaking of a priori (inferred) or deductive principles • In an absolute sense. The logician of science obviously stands at some distance from the investigator’s first trial-and-error efforts. e. formulating premises. 3. • There are 3 types of general laws: 1. Observational laws. since some laws are more remote than others from immediate observation or measurement the distinction can be helpful. organizes the materials according to accepted rules. iv. Law of Effect. 38)
. Any differentiation between description and explanation can only be made on the basis of convenience. though he is not always excluded from the satisfaction of locating new fieds of work. The logician smoothes and coordinates crude findings. Based on the direct manipulation of things. 36) • • • Like the original investigator (scientist).
Logic of Science and Historical Philosophy (p. o His critique also ranges over time and traces variations and similarities in the premises employed for setting problems at different periods and places. In addition. 2. typically those relating some event to one or many others. the distinction between empirical and rational laws is useless since science has no a priori principles. Based on the observation of events. • As a rule.All descriptions and propositions are constructions. o The logician is able to cut across specific enterprises in order to compare research methods. and constructing new frames of reference. The science of science is comparative and historical.g. establishing viewpoints. generally imply immediate contact with events. The Role of Systems in Research (p. Based on inference of events. the logician of science is interested in the original scientist’s interbehavior with events. explanations constitute elaborate descriptions. The science of science assists in setting up postulates. Rational laws. Empirical and Rational Laws • Empirical laws have been regarded as descriptions derived from observation. in contrast with rational laws. However. • Empirically laws. b. Experimental laws.
Science and Conceptualism • The conceptualistic scientist does not emphasize absolute truth but clings nonetheless to dualistic notions.• • •
The activities of scientists include: constructing concepts. Science and Positivism • The positivists’ primary thesis is that principles and laws are direct correlates of things studied. Science and Realism • Realistic scientists regard constructional work as merely formulational and believe the formula represents independent existents discovered by scientists (as opposed to a continuous interbehavioral field). Realistic philosophy has two aspects. There is not an agreement to the constructional process involved in science due to our exposure to historical philosophy (which is dualistic). concepts. and each response is specialized on the basis of the setting in which the contact occurs.
. The epistemological side of realistic scientists refuses to admit that mental states or sense data constitute the objects studied. states of mind) whether or not corresponding to external things. The individual in turn develops many corresponding response functions. principles. they are but evidences of things-inthemselves.
• • •
Science and Idealism • • Idealistic scientists are the extreme creationists. The basis for their thesis is that the things dealt with in science are themselves constructed from elementary processes called sensations. laws. Knowledge for the idealistic scientist consists of ideas or concepts (i.
The idealistic scientists beliefs that knowledge is different than the things known. The process of developing descriptions of things (e. and hypotheses.e. names. For any one individual every object or event usually has a very large number of stimulus functions. In this world are placed entities and forces looked upon as Platonic reals.g. laws) is transformed into the creation of things. The ontological constitutes belief in the autonomous existence of a world entirely independent of the scientist. An organism performs a number of different responses to the same object.
historical or geographical criteria. and domestic life).) Scientific techniques become more elaborate as the culture it operates within become more complex. political. instruments. behavior patterns (rites.• • •
For the conceptualistic scientist scientific laws and descriptions become conventional symbols for representing things.
The scientist is not a spiritistic entity arbitrarily creating statements or laws out of his own substance. the factors of investigation. o Cultural Behavior constitutes every variety of interaction with things. It may be separated into two aspects: behavior and behavior products. and procedures—in short. law. Specialized institutions within cultures concern the nature of theories. o Cultural Products consist of institutions.
CHAPTER 3: SCIENTIFIC ENTERPRISES AS CULTURAL INSTITUTIONS The Cultural Matrices of the Sciences (p. records. techniques. and events.g. which reduces science to rationalistic and verbal description. persons. To study the sciences as cultural institutions promotes a factual description of them in contrast to treating them as (a) formal and deductive or (b) ultra inductive entities. manners. politics. symbols. 45) • • Cultures influence scientific enterprises and thus science is a phase of culture. variations in research designs. religion. different conventions of making chemical analyses.
Science as a Cultural Institution • • • No matter how highly evolved scientific enterprises become they carry with them their basic cultural characteristics. The most pointed scientific institutions consist of technique systems intimately integrated with the scientist’s particular researches (e. hypotheses. customs. The conceptualistic scientist overlooks the fact that the scientist works with definite materials. Culture consists of the civilization of a group of person united on the basis of societal. fetishes. Institutional objects arise as products of the coordinated behavior of human individuals. He is an individual reared in a certain culture. language. social organizations of persons functioning in the domains of art. acting on the basis of his background and contacts. ceremonials) and objects (tools. There is no need to avoid identifying descriptive abstractions with concrete
upon closer analysis. Derived constructs stem from operations upon events and from prior constructs based directly or remotely upon interbehavioral situations.
. Culture must reach a particular stage of life before it can support scientific institutions. Explanation in science is based upon coincidence and analogy. All scientific “miracles” resolve themselves. in the latter there is contraction and expansion according to various spatiotemporal dimensions.
The science-culture spiral operates in both a linear and areal fashion. procedures. 48) • Scientific institutions once evolved become cultural items potent enough to influence other cultural phases (the constant changes taken place can be likened to an upwardmoving spiral). Science Affects Culture. Emphasis on events ordinarily obviates such influences In the interpretation of his work the scientist may be swayed so much by traditional formulations that he neglects his actual findings • It may affect the proportion of derived and imposed constructs in scientific interpretation. and interpretations: it extends to canons and rules. The Science-Cultural Spiral (p. events inevitably are made to conform to various ideological or procedural traditions. 52) • Institutionalization of the scientific enterprise does not stop with reification and standardization of assumptions.investigations. or stops making atomic bombs. o Culture Affects Science. into a profusion of cultural details. The peak of such assumptions is the advocacy of a vacation from science. If the worker and his cultural background predominate. The mere fact that science has originated and flourished in certain societies and not in others is evidence enough of cultural influence. When propositions interrelate various unit events we have essentially theoretical or abstract constructs—explanatory laws. for the development of destructive instruments and techniques. in other words. 50) • Institutionalization of so highly a fluid event as scientific interbehavior upsets the proper balance between the scientific worker and his materials. In the former it advances or retrogresses along a space-time line. • It may affect the relative weight of fact and tradition in investigation and theory.
Effects of Scientific Institutionalization (p. a period when the worker abandons his laboratory.
Scientific Canons as Cultural Institutions (p. A favorite theme is that science is or is not responsible for unemployment.
etc. The knower is reduced to states of consciousness or endowed with a mind consisting of such states. The simple fact that science is the work of persons who construct descriptions and formulae about the things and events with which they interbehave has been transformed into the mystery: How can a knowing mind interact with things known? On the one side it is asserted that the knower and the known are absolutely different and incompatible entities. which originally arise from specific procedures of analyzing. The mind-matter and inner-outer dichotomies lead to the appearance-reality institution designed to differentiate between phenomena and the ultimate reality existing beyond them and giving them their basis and validity. Appearance and Reality. From the large dualistic principle arise the following specialized dualistic institutions. o Influential because of its pervasions of every cultural department o Harmful because it has engendered offshoot institutions which hamper many phases of science.
. are merely phantasms which are not as real as particles in motion. tastes. Improperly conceived causal canons have blocked scientific advances. sounds. synthesizing. cold.. o Inner and Outer Worlds. • Outstanding beneficial canons are the standards of precision which regulate hypotheses and procedures and govern the measurements made in solving specific problems. warmth. The original event serves merely as a cue for the creational effort. become fixated they thereafter exert both beneficial and harmful influences. subject and object are regards as verbal correlates from a homogeneous (psychic) source. comparing. • General cultural developments as the evolution of technology offset any bad effects from the standardization of scientific procedures. A specialized form of world-dichotomization is the institution that sets inner psychic processes over against the external world of reality. 53) • The dichotomy principle is without a doubt the most influential and harmful of all scientific institutions. and evaluating things and events. o Subject and Object. These produce even more potent effects since they impinge more directly upon the scientific worker’s interpretations. Throughout the many variations of this general dualistic principle scientists have agreed that colors. Problems are then raised whether the inner states mirror independent outer conditions or whether the outer world comprises projections of the inner state.
The Dualistic Institution and Its Issues (p. On the other side.•
When scientific canons.
g. behaviorist). and the necessary differences in scientific methods.
CHAPTER 4: SCIENTIFIC SYSTEMS AS CULTURAL INSTITUTIONS From Scientific Enterprise to System Institution (p. parties.
The Practical Role of Scientific Institutions (p. Questions then arise concerning the effectiveness and coherence of laws. As western European science changed from Pagan to Christian civilization enormous changes were witnessed. When techniques become standards and practices become mores they form authoritative institutions which block the discovery of the nature and operation of things. may be personal.
. of course. mentalist vs. Overlooked entirely is the fact that evaluations are genuine events made on the basis of interbehaving with things. Each instance of scientific authoritarianism demonstrates the opposition between events and favored constructions. Values. This is accounted for by the vast number and variety of things interbehaved with.
Existence and Value. o
Laws are often regarded as Platonic forms hovering over concrete and contingential happenings. This shifting may be described as turning away from eventbound to autonomous (event-free) constructs. o In autonomous constructs descriptions are derived from some other than a scientific source are imposed upon events. o In event-bound constructs descriptions and explanations are drawn from one’s interbehavior with things and events. but they may also be authentic evaluations of essential properties of things and of the way events operate. 55) • • • • Established institutions take on various roles through their sponsorship by particular individuals. and other groups. 59) • As soon as scientific enterprises reach the stage of theory and law construction generalizations begin to multiply. We have already observed how institutionalized theories concerning psychic powers and the nervous system as the seat of mental states have dominated and retarded not only psychology but other sciences as well. therefore unreal. The cultural traditions which influence scientific enterprises are seen as psychic factors. this leads at once to the institution of systems (which change with shifts in the matrices of historical and cultural circumstances). schools. Realities by contrast are presumed to be ultimate’s beyond the reach of a person’s actions. Institutions also compete and clash (e.
By means of symbols and propositions assertions are made. instead of eventbound they were event-free in other words.g. Constructs. There is no better way to describe this development than to point out the power achieved by symbols. • Descartes. products of reflective and creative behavior.Historical Evolution of Scientific Systems (p. laws.) Emergence of Autistic Constructs The historical shift from the Hellenic toward the Hellenistic period marks a definite stage of scientific evolution. principles established which encourage distant and indirect contact with things. By abstractional references. Various philosophers have attempted to develop improved systems for evaluating methods and basic postulates. Systems in the History of Science (p. B.) Period of Event-Bound Systems In a primitive way the Greeks sought vigorously for some formula of reality by keeping close to visible materials (e. Descartes proposed the following precepts for rightly conducting the reason and seeking for truth in the sciences. doctrines are stabilized. 59) • Current scientific institutions have grown from roots in the culture of ancient Greece. In general. by the employment of substitute symbols. belief in investigation is supplanted by faith in doctrine and in the word.
. whether practical investigators or theoretical observers. (1) Accept nothing as true (2) Dived up each of the difficulties examined into as many parts as possible . and theories were no longer integrated with concrete happenings. IN the period of the Sophists distinctive changes in Greek social life were correlated with a new type of principle existence and reality Science consisted of the imposition of law or name upon events. Emphasis is placed upon abstract values. As a result when the Renaissance scientists revived the naïve atomism of the Greeks they transformed (1) crude things into sophisticated matter and (2) knowing interbehavior into spiritual substance or process. reality is made into something nobler than the things and events of direct interbehavior. The church was responsible for introducing and fostering this dichotomy into the culture. have been deeply impressed with the discoordination between propositions derived from events and those stemming from cultural sources. 64) • Since the 17th century logicians of science. Significance is accorded to those alleged counterparts of events which elude and transcend actual contacts. A. water).
Neither the naked hand nor the understanding left to itself can effect much. • • Applaud as we must these aphorisms. and from these principles. There are and can be only two ways of searching into an discovering truth.(3) Carry on reflections in due order. among those which do not follow a natural sequence relative to one another. It would be an unsound fancy and self-contradictory to expect that things which have never yet been done can be done except by means which have never yet been tried. commencing with objects that were the most simple and easy to understand. This is the true way. And this way is now in fashion. • VIII. can do and understand so much and so much only as he has observed in fact or in thought of the course of nature: beyond this he neither knows anything nor can he do anything. so the instruments of the mind supply either suggestions for the understanding or cautions. • VI. which are as much wanted for the understanding as for the hand. rather than to sciences. Moreover the works already known are due to chance and experiment. we cannot but regard them as remote from concrete enterprises. even if a fictitious one. so that it arrives at the most general axioms last of all. The one flies from the senses and particulars to the most general axioms. Newton. • III. Human knowledge and human power meet in one. assuming an order. for the sciences we now possess are merely systems for the nice ordering and setting forth of things already invented. or by degrees. and that which in contemplation is as the cause is the operation as the rule. rising by a gradual and unbroken ascent. but as yet untried. Nature to be commanded must be obeyed. But though he speaks of experimental philosophy. The logic now in use serves rather to fix and give stability to the errors which have their foundation in commonly received notions than to help the search after truth. It is by instruments and helps that the work is done. the workers of this period still sought the absolute
. proceeds to judgment and to the discovery of middle axioms. • XII. Man. • II. So it does more harm than good. From particular things to universal laws (axioms) marked the path of scientific progress. The other derives axioms from the senses and particulars. for where the cause is not known the effect cannot be produced. And as the instruments of the hand either give motion or guide it. • I. The rules of reasoning for natural philosophy set up by Newton reflect an advanced stage of scientific achievement. to knowledge of the most complex. Bacon used the following aphorisms to illustrate his idea of a scientific system. in order to rise little by little. • Bacon. (4) In all cases make enumerations so complete and reviews so general so as to be certain of having omitted nothing. being the servant and interpreter of Nature. especially when their date is taken into account. not methods of invention or directions for new work. the truth of which it takes fro settled and immovable. • XIX.
o Locke. Science attempts nothing less than to establish the existence of the external world. originated in the mind. What was left were states of consciousness. Insisted that Locke was mistaken: it was not necessary to differentiate between primary and secondary qualities. Therefore to the same natural effects we must. Locke pushed the dependence of the mind. notwithstanding any contrary hypotheses that may be imagined. by which they may either be made more accurate. Hume. Berkeley. as far as possible. all knowledge. size. By his insistence that there are no innate ideas or basic processes of knowledge independent of known things. Scientific facts are used to support metaphysics and vice versa. • Rule IV. and Newtonian systems. In experimental philosophy we are to look upon propositions inferred by general induction from phenomena as accurately or very nearly true. We are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances. Causation and objectivity were reduced to mental habits which themselves had not inhering substance. assign the same causes. Underlying the Cartesian. a thing unknown and unknowable at the other. Invented the doctrine of specific never energies with which to account for the existence in the soul of sensation qualities when the external qualityless. which admit neither intensification nor remission of degrees. thing-in-itself acted on the end organs. so far as to reduce things to ideas. whether of shape. sensations. • Rule 3.laws governing the system of the world. is the assumption that science results from an impact of things upon some sort of psychic substance or process. till such time as other phenomena occur.
. are to be esteemed the universal qualities of all bodies whatsoever. he also advocated the extrusion of the unified soul. or liable to exceptions. which he regarded as a tabula rasa. Kant.
Metasystems in the History of Science (p. • Rule 1. with only the psychic principles of association to bind them together. Ideas existed only as they were instituted by some outside factor. Agreed that experience is only the beginning of knowledge. of color or taste. He built up his complex epistemology: a transcendental unity of apperception at one end. in between these two the empirical mind and empirical objects. The qualities of bodies. for instance. 67) • Traditional metasystemic presuppositions concern the nature of reality and the cognitive power of the knower. Muller. or impenetrability. • Newtonian principles are impressive in their austerity and relative paucity (small) of minute correlation with any concrete scientific job. He refused to follow Berkeley in making use of God to establish the existence of external things. even unknown. Baconian. • Rule 2. and which are found to belong to all bodies within the reach of our experiments.
(4) Postulational Systems. 72) • • • It should now be possible to formulate satisfactory scientific systems yet we find mainly hesitation. A psychology freed from spiritistic constructs finds only minute differences between (1) observing something by perceiving it directly and (2) by means of a substitutive factor. The central question is: What properties and conditions of things are discernable? (3) Operational Systems. Enterprises featuring the observer or scientific worker. incompatibility of system and metasystem.o
Four Stages of Scientific Systems (p. Implies surveillance over all the features of any scientific job.
. of basic assumptions and presuppositions. of system and metasystem. Then follows a careful formulation of procedures. (1) Thing Systems.
CHAPTER 5: INTERBEHAVIORAL EVOLUTION OF THE SCIENCES From Crude to Refined Contacts (p. such as observing heat by thermometer readings. But every phase is directly intertwined with the specific circumstances of persons and their social background. (2) Knowledge Systems. Scientific evolution is in no sense a straight-line development. 76) • • • All contemporary sciences are products of a detailed cultural evolution. In view of the complexity in the careers of scientists and their work we often must infer actions from products. Workers take special notice of background conditions. Designed to check on the relations between the behavior of observing and the behavior of observed things. It allows for the integration of postulates and protopostulates. Procedures for observation become a second-order event. Amplified the doctrine of the biological basis of knowledge. The fact that scientific work is interbehavior with things becomes a postulate of the system. An objective approach to psychology and other sciences is provided by the interbehavioral plan we have been proposing. There is hardly a doubt that an intensified understanding of postulational methods would greatly contribute to the techniques of scientific system building. The scientist considers the potentialities and limitations of technological and ideological currents. In early stages of science the aim was to construct propositions concerning the nature and operation of things. clash of viewpoints. He invented many specific energies in place of the four Muller proposed. 71) • The history of system making reveals the successive development of four unique types of scientific logic. Current Scientific Systemology (p.
(1) Astronomy • The scientific origins of astronomy are embedded in the period of simple prediction. (2) Geometry • Perhaps more than in other historical enterprises the historian who traces the evolution of geometry must be selective and atomistic. are highly apparent. • The evolution of geometry affords a transparent view into the operations of both the practical and theoretical participants.Evolution of the Particular Sciences (p. It is to be expected that in this complicated development folklore has crept in at many points to replace the worker’s direct contact with objects. especially the principle of gravitation. 77) • To illustrate the interbehavioral development of the various sciences we sample several departments in order to trace successive contact levels. • Since astronomy is an observational instead of laboratory science its instruments facilitate an inspective rather than a manipulative contact with things. has no occasion to conceal its struggle in achieving such riches. To a great extent the history of chemistry consists of: (a) the processes of increasing the number of elements and (b) the progressive changes in interpreting the • The evolution of chemistry admirably illustrates the continuity between contacts with things in ordinary situations and the most elaborate theoretical developments. temporal and spatial contacts requires a knowledge of elements. • A culture which possesses (1) a descriptive astronomy employing such powerful tools as an observatory housing a 200-inch telescope and (2) a cosmogony which penetrates into the most distant reaches of extragalactic space. because chemical contacts. and thus is able to elaborate theories concerning the origin and movements of planetary systems and galaxies. such as the attempts to determine the relative sizes and distances of astronomical things. • When finally the highly abstract non-Euclidean geometry became associated with the physicist’s description of nature. immediate or remote. • For an elaborate development of astronomy the technological evolution of culture was a prime necessity. pressure. • Associated closely with early calculative techniques are expansive developments in geometric measurement. To understand the composition of things and their modes of interbehavior under such specified conditions as temperature. • Modern chemical development continues the search for: (a) the elements which combine to form things and (b) the processes and conditions of combination
. Of greatest moment for us in the fact that complex theories concerning space and time again became integrated with descriptions of concrete things and events. (3) Chemistry Chemistry is basically concerned with the nature of elements. a significant circle in geometric evolution was completed.
(5) Physics • • • • Because of the things and events which interest the physicist. his domain. and neutrons which in various modifiable configurations constitute. dominated by scientific interests. chemistry has reached a stage of complex analysis which does not tolerate eternal substances and absolute particles. Today. To be acceptable medical hypotheses must lend themselves to experimental testing. All recent arguments by physicists concerning the reality or irrealty of statistical constructs completely fail to differentiate (a) the original events. • One the whole. after all. theories) from direct contact with particular things. At first physicists were troubled when they shifted their focus to particles and movements to small to see. The necessity to use tools.• •
Advances in various sciences and technology (e. This need for adjustment is troublesome only because it involves a shift in cultural attitude.
(4) Medical Science • In a unique manner medical science illustrates the accumulation and refinement of constructs (principles. and biological operations can propositions be sustained. • Even though the primary conditions surrounding the origin and evolution of medicine were practical ones.
. chemical. more than other scientific branches.g. medical theories are strictly subject to at least potential validation. has historically been closely articulated with technological situations. biology) led to the discovery of new elements. the fact that manipulations and calculations are different from things and events interbehaved with involves no reality problem. this evolution constitutes a long record of discoveries and inventions connected with the problem of maintaining organisms in their environment. (c) the transformations wrought in such events by investigational operations. Difficulties arise only when contacts with things are separated from the final formulations summing up those contacts. • Today. As in subatomic physics. laws. in an improved for. atoms which were formerly regarded as indestructible are now considered as complex organizations of electrons. A statistical formula does not imply (a) that there are no definite events aside from those the investigator constructs or projects. the structures and changes of specific substances. In short. Physics is successful precisely because its abstract constructs are derived from manipulations. only by physical. or (b) that there is no access to them. electrical science. the medical field was. and (d) the final constructs built up to describe them. protons. (b) the operations performed upon them.
(2) Biological Science • The biological sciences being limited to organic things and events are narrower in range as compared with physics and chemistry. • Biologists emphasize i. biologists incline toward the physiochemical aspect of organism which aids research. The behavior and interbehavior of objects could thus be determined by a manipulatory operation. • Operationism in physics developed first from the procedure of isolating a body or system for study. epistemological. tissue. • The epistemological stage of biology is characterized by a curious opposition of interpretation and evaluation. and postulational) of scientific progress represent constructs varying in degree of descriptive effectiveness. This progressive refinement of constructs marks an increased sophistication concerning the things studied as well as the general scientific enterprise The four stages (thing. orders. and phyla). • The thing stage of biology centers around natural history. • The necessary physiochemical abstractness thus leads scientists away from concrete events. individuality of form and structure. operational. the internal development of the sciences consists of a progressive movement toward abstract constructs. • The operational phase of biology pertains to the manipulative (dissection) and experimental developments. changes involved in metabolism and growth. system. (1) Physiochemical Science • Although the physiochemical sciences have developed the most abstract constructs. • Particular experimental constructs mark the processes of infection. and the secretion of antibodies as responses to antigens
. On the one hand.Evolution Within the Sciences (p. immunization. • Even in the earliest thing stage. • Postulational physics stresses not only the events and procedures of a particular research but also systemic problems. and iii. uniqueness and specific organization—that is. and organism. with its interest in taxonomic and geographic distribution (species. genera. they are still basically rooted in objects and their relations. ii. families. 90) • • • As in general scientific evolution. and thus have undergone a specialized evolution. On the other hand. • Important anatomical constructs are cell. physical scientists sought for abstruse constructs to sum up the nature and properties of objects. classes. biologists build technological and vitalistic constructs which retreat from original events. • As long as the scientist keeps close to a concrete research situation he can weave long strands of constructs. historical continuation despite variations of successive generations and evolutional modifications.
of course. science occurs even when experimentation is not feasible. 99) • • • Experimentation is the life of science. • The postulational stage of psychology is achieved by adding to experimentation and mensuration. • Man the scientist. a systemic background with postulates derived from events.•
When the biologist treats actual interbehavioral fields in which the primary happenings are the mutual interactions of organisms and environing factors he achieves an authentic postulational phase of construct building. This view pays tribute to the operational and interbehavioral view of science. • The historical spiritistic interval between the two biological periods marks the knowledge stage of psychology. the thing and epistemological stages are thoroughly mixed).
(3) Psychological Science • The basic problems of a psychological science are analysis and interpretation. Experimentation represents means toward a given end although it is often wrongly considered the ultimate scientific criterion. • Psychological events constitute simply the processes and movements of the various animals. Experimentation only becomes feasible after other activities have been completed. So far the primary advance has consisted of withholding impositions from one’s own culture. their integration with biological facts. a point we develop in the next three chapters where we consider the fundamental scientific methods and techniques. • Psychologists doubtless stand on solid ground when they regard their discipline as dating only from its experimental period. • When modern scientists returned to the view that psychological events are activities of biological organisms they reattached psychology securely to concrete things. discover himself as a natural object. • Postulational anthropology is in its infancy. (4) Anthropological Science • In anthropological science the four stages do not stand out (e.
Chapter 6: The Logic of Scientific Experimentation Experimentation as Interbehavior (p. • Circumstances of human organisms and their culture determine that the operational stage of anthropology should be extremely specialized. make it possible to trace back the thing stage of psychology to ancient medicine and biology. • The ubiquity of psychological events.g. • The interbehavioral principles exhibited in the evolution of the sciences operate equally well in their prosecution. however. which guarantee close contact with things and events. not from extrascientific sources. could not. but applies only to the manipulative and not the interpretative phase of the early experimental period.
Just because the Greeks lacked sophisticated experimental equipment this did not mean that they were not experimentalists. manipulation. In all scientific work the observational procedure is paramount. Experiments using this form of methodology utilize instruments of various sorts to modify things and events. o Manipulation.
For example. custom. Scientific experimentation is nothing more nor less than an evolution of ordinary trialand-error procedures. during which the worker develops increasingly greater expertness and precision. since even the most complex transformations consist merely of intensifying the trend of events previously discovered. which are in no sense created by the experimenter. alchemy). Experimental techniques and procedures.g. Transformation (p. if it is impossible to overvalue the theorist’s work of developing problems and suggesting their experimental solution.
There is an inseverable relationship between theorists and experimentalists. To emphasize experimentation in science is to pay a signal tribute to our constantly stressed interbehavioral principle that science proceeds on the basis of contacts with things and events. o Observation. laws.
. o Experimentalists are guided closely by the hypotheses suggested by theoretical considerations.
Evolution of Experimentation (p. o Transformation. Is a methodology that involves an elaborate rearrangement of materials. and transformation. Manipulative forms of experimentation were performed in the medieval period (e. are never full-blown creations of any particular time: they evolve within a spiral bounded by events that are nowhere discontinuous. In many sciences the events of interest have long since passed so observation is the only method available. Technical methods borrowed from the Far East stimulated Western European science resulting in a peak in scientific development. like language. o Theorists construct equations with a close regard to experimental findings. 103) • In the continuum of scientific interbehavior there are three salient procedures— observation. Manipulation. As a rule observation is a field method. 101) • • • • • Experimentation being but an expert type of contact with objects and events can easily be traced throughout human culture. rule-of-thumb manipulations. and art.
and transformation comprise a continuum of procedures it is scientifically advantageous to respect their differences. • The history of science has shown that even with simple apparatuses science has made great advances (e. and insensitivity to new methods. and when they become prescribed forms of operations they tend to function as research-hampering traditions. g. Newton). 104) • • Scientific research must go hand in hand with the problem and the type of event worked upon. • The scientist’s spontaneity. are neglected. 3. • Let the scientist be even slightly interested in pecuniary gains aside from the intimate scientific core of the situation and his research is immediately affected. • Frequently workers persist in using apparatus for too long a period and for too many problems. immense ranges of scientific enterprises. Galileo. o Science becomes restricted to situations amenable to certain kinds of contacts with events. the attack proper must be directed by the event studied. Emphasis on procedure • To emphasize procedure is to encourage standardization. experimentation becomes a ritual. Science is neither just a method nor just a philosophy. o All three phases of the ritualistic view lead to a stultification of the science. Autistic Self-Expression • To matter what motivates a scientist to attack a particular problem. 1. • To assume that investigations cannot go on without complicated instruments is a distinct deterrent to research. At the same time. dull routine. Leaving the spontaneity of scientific work reduced. manipulation. the task of discovering the nature of events minimized. yet overemphasis on apparatus is ritualistic & therefore problematic.•
Although observation. 2. We are at present interested in the comparison between different scientists
. and freedom of operation concerning the events and problems which concern him we do not count as autistic self-expression. • Laboratory techniques are certainly not the exclusive methods of investigating events. • Manipulation must be adapted to the exigencies of the research situation. • Manipulation is important but no scientific work consists of sheer manipulation. o By excessive insistence on method. especially those not yet formalized and established. Stress of Apparatus • Tools and instruments obviously facilitate work (occasionally there are delays in scientific progress until a new tool is developed).
Experimentation and Scientific Ritual (p. individuality.
his wider range or resources. Only after making a theoretical and practical survey of situation do we construct a hypothesis. gigantic amounts of trial and error. The overemphasis of data leads to devaluation of the work of structuring facts to yield
. The choice of experimental design depends upon particular circumstances.
Experimentation: Method of Magic (p. his more intense insight. In any legitimate research no such simple formula is possible. different sorts of operations may yield similar results. Actually. Indeed. a fact which interferes violently with the notion of a crucial experiment. In many cases there is a slow plodding procedure. The assertion that the formulation of a problem is more essential than the solution implies that manipulations depend directly upon hypotheses. Scientific originality may seem sudden. even speculative even though experimentation remains a pronounced feature of all investigational situations. The role of scientific experimentation in verifying or testing hypotheses offers further proof that it is method integrated with subject matter. This is demonstrated by the breakdown of the ideal of varying one variable at a time and keeping all the other variables constant. The greater facility of some particular worker. It is not exceptional that experiments fail.• •
or between the work of the same scientist with different problems. and oftentimes tremendous loss of effort. 107) • • • • • • • • • • Science is in part theoretical. Experimentation is both an adventure and an arduous labor. all stem from increased contact with similar events and problems. A close inspection of scientific success usually indicates many failures and backtracking. no important problem is ever solved by one experiment or by one type of experiment. but it is the result of an accumulation of work done previously (continuum). “magic” indicates confidence in the assumption that a set of operations (demonstrations) would definitely permanently settle scientific questions. In scientific circles.
Experimentation and Scientific Slogans • There is considerable advantage for science as a whole when we distinguish between experimentation as an integral feature of scientific situations and as a weapon wielded in extra-scientific circumstances.
Experimentation: The Core of Science (p. 4.
. The most effective means of interbehaving precisely with objects and events is through experimentation.laws and principles. • New discoveries are resisted when experiments counter the preferred theory. o There is a gulf between theory construction and fact production. • The dependence of experimentation on time periods. but for effective progress. • Almost any experimental result can be reconciled with almost any theory. a happy blend of these two powers is necessary. takes experimentation out of the range of formalized argument. The electrical structure of matter. • Experimentalism implies that instrumental studies are absolute in method and result. • One overlooks that interpretation is an integral part of an experiment. Once a technique has been perfected facts are rather easy to obtain. whose work makes facts tell their story and prove their worth. • Experimental results are not always accepted.” –Lord Rutherford. The cry is for more facts. Experiments Impede Progress. • “Experiment without imagination or imagination without recourse to experiment. o The assumption that facts are ends in themselves pushes aside the theorist. moreover that results are frequently capable of varying interpretation. Discoordination of Results and Interpretations. • A potent warning against treating experiments as other than tentative interbehavior we find in those situations in which experiments impede proper theories and thus become obstacles to scientific progress. The insistence upon facts is not so serious as the demand for sheer manipulation to which experimentalism frequently descends. To sharpen the difference between experimentation as (a) an effective form of scientific investigation and (b) as a slogan employed in argument we discuss the following points. Rejection of Experimental Findings. In a scientific enterprise one cannot separate manipulations from interpretations any more than from preceding hypotheses. 1. 3. Experimentation not Absolute. can accomplish little. 221. 114) • • • Dissect from the body of experimentation such accretions as exploitation and improper bias: what remains is the core of science. 2. assuming that the situation lends itself to experimental treatment. both with respect to available apparatus and ideational system. Experimentation is the core of science because a free manipulation of investigational objects and a judicious handling of events under scrutiny are the best means of reaching desired results.
such as rates and amounts.Experimental Goals (p. Origins and Developments. 2. his descriptions and interpretations of them. manipulation. Occurrence problems arise from the compresence of some thing in a certain situation (i. indicating essential ignorance and search.
. Another experimental goal is to determine the presence or absence of some item already established as existing. Quantity or Magnitude. 7. At almost every step in any complicated research one needs to devise controlling activities such as hypotheses and alternative trials. Manipulations may be characterized as analogical— namely. Event Relations. and transformation of elements and situations. 115) • Each specific scientific enterprise has its unique objective. Synthetic Experiments. That experimental manipulation involves construction follows from the fact that experimentation always occurs in situations which exclude casual and random handling of things. 3. The discovery of complicated variables. 103) that experimental contacts for the most part concern observation. conditional events). Occurrence Determination. In some instances the manipulations involve analysis and dissection— breaking up a thing to determine its component parts and their interaction. Nature of Object or Event. 117) • • • We have seen (p. By contrast. at the same time an orientation which makes manipulations rational and results promising. 6. constructs concern the worker’s references to events.
Contacts and Constructs in Experimentation (p. It is only by knowing he interdependence of events that one can dispense with particular experiments. In the following list we indicate some of these experimental goals. the reproduction of structures already known in other related chemical substances. In other situations manipulations are performed to reveal the interrelation of two unreduced objects in a single reaction. 4. 5. Many types of experimental manipulations are designed to discover the nature of some object or event. may require the development and application of mensurational instruments.e. The problem here is the effect of one thing upon another. 1. A specialized type of experimental goal is directed toward the ascertainment of quantity or magnitude. A working hypothesis is a guiding and selecting construction. Presence or Absence. Correlations and functions are required for connecting two or more different kinds of things. The specific manipulations of the biological sciences.