Republic of the Philippines

Bicol University
College of Social Sciences and Philosophy
Philosophy Department
Daraga, Albay

Flor, Patrick Vincent

Imperial, Nicole Angela
Lagata, Von Joseph
Lunas, Krisha Lieza
Murillo, Roy Jello
Rosales, Zeke Gabrielle

AB PHILOSOPHY III

PHILOSOPHY 39: PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

LEARNING OUTPUT No. 1:

THE PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE

The Philosophy of Science is one of the prominent disciplines that studies scientific inquiries
from a philosophical perspective – the foundations, features, and relationship between science and
philosophy. This paper delves on the intriguing facets of Philosophy of Science, as we dealt on the
following primitive questions: 1) What is the relationship between science and philosophy?, 2) What is
philosophy of science?, 3) Can we consider all scientific problems a philosophical problem and vice
versa?, 4) Do you consider archeology as an actual science? If yes, what made you say that it is, in fact, a
science? If no, explain and defend your answer thoroughly, 5) Lastly, is it important to draw a
demarcation line between science and pseudoscience?

The concepts of philosophy and science are both concerned with the characteristics of logic as
well as reasoning, however, differ in ways it was perceived and addressed with the knowledge in a form
of question. It is indeed debatable about the grounds of science and philosophy in terms of their
similarities and differences. Science deals with the hypothesis on factual data whereas philosophy deals
with logical analysis based on reason. Moreover, science deals with the proving of natural phenomena.
On the other hand Philosophy is focus on the aspect of questioning things that are in concern of human
existence and the phenomena in reality. Furthermore, it deals with the logical analysis based on the given
reasons in certain circumstances. Science was a branch of philosophy and was called "natural science".
More so, philosophy concerns the connection between existence and our realities.

With this, the foundations of philosophy and science have brought an imperative discipline that
attends to the limits of science and deals to its profundity. It gives prominence in the field of sciences to
provide best answers, in-depth clarifications of theories and concepts, and leads to enhancements. This
study is called Philosophy of Science. It is highly concerned with the shortcomings and implications of
science, whereas philosophy has a pivotal role in supplying solutions and justifications to such concerns.
Philosophy serves as a driving force to science to function well and keep it intact. Adhering to the fact
that science cannot sustain itself from its ambiguities and challenges, philosophy thus takes over. As
argued by Lawrence Robert Kuhn (2020) in his interview that tackles the value of philosophy in science
as he dealt this quest with other philosophers, scientists, and philosopher-scientists, there, the general
 Republic of the Philippines
Bicol University
College of Social Sciences and Philosophy
Philosophy Department
Daraga, Albay
claim was that “Philosophy benefits science” in five (5) accounts. First, philosophy clarifies the queries
posed by science, and establishes answers that are more precise. Secondly, it expands probing questions –
enlarging the scope of problems that science can solve. Third, Philosophy enhances scientific method.
Fourth, philosophy caters the “demarcation problem” – that defines the boundaries between science and
pseudo-science. Lastly, as philosophy sets the limits of science by identifying real science from non-
sciences.

Moreover, the philosophy of science is an a priori investigative method in dealing the questions –
both Normative and Descriptive questions – about the science foundations to further strengthen it. The
philosophy of science supports science by ensuring that misapplication of science is curtailed; by
showcasing the science proper limits of power, and supports science by facilitating the systematic and
theoretical evaluation in order for science to function well. It is a subfield of philosophy that scrutinizes
the overall methodology of science. Take for an instance, if we think about the structure of a certain
scientific discipline: all the concepts, subjects, and theories that it encompasses; then, take its
assumptions, reasoning, hypothesis or other epidemiological factors that the structure is based or derived
upon, the philosophy of science can deal with the examination and evaluation of these relationships and
can assess the process of tracing why and how we believe certain things to be scientifically sound. Hence,
the Philosophy of Science navigates science by getting its essence, dealing with its limitations, and
strengthening it through delving how it should work.

Furthermore, on the query about considering all scientific problems a philosophical problem and
vice versa, we have concluded an affirmative notion on the consideration of scientific problems as
philosophical problems, however, on the latter we have repudiated the idea. We can consider all scientific
problems a philosophical problem since the studies concerning science were a derivative of what used to
be a series of philosophical investigations in the past. Aristotle, who is more prominent as a philosopher,
was one of the pioneers of the study of science after his musings about logic and biological science until
later on, scientific studies had scraped itself as a study of philosophy and became an independent body of
knowledge. However, we cannot consider all philosophical problems as a scientific problem due to the
fact that there are studies in philosophy that science does not indulge in. One of these examples are ethical
and moral investigations and the studies on the philosophy of language. We can also consider the study of
God’s existence as not a part of scientific problems because science has no interest in proving an entity
that cannot be perceived by the senses and lacks material evidence of its existence.

On the question if we do consider archeology as an actual science? We assert an equidistant

answer that lies on both philosophical and scientific grounds on such reasons and considerations. First,
we dealt with understanding the profound context of the question. We first grasped what does it mean to
be an archeologist, an archeologist's primary goal is to place material remains in historical contexts, to
enhance what is known from written sources, and thereby to increase understanding of the past.
Ultimately, an archeologist is a historian: his/her goal is to provide an interpretive depiction of man's past.
Now, this leaves us with a very interesting dilemma, on one side we can consider archeology as a
philosophy that interpret the inherent human condition in different timelines, and on the other we may say
it is indeed a scientific study that adheres to a specified scientific method to discover and understand
aspects of human history.

For us, it plays within the neural middle of philosophy and actual science. Since it implores
scientific techniques to “rediscover” what was once lost, as well as at the same time it places its discovery
 Republic of the Philippines
Bicol University
College of Social Sciences and Philosophy
Philosophy Department
Daraga, Albay
into historical context in order for us to better understand our past which can be considered to be the
philosophy of history. We believe that archeology is the end result of an instance when the practicality
and methods of science meets and merges with the hypothesis and conceptualization of Philosophy
through history. To summarize, Archeology is somewhat in the middle of both the
historical/philosophical and scientific worlds. It implores aspects from both worlds to lobby and confirm
its theories and hypothesis as well as push for a greater human understanding in terms of who we are and
where we are as a species, and even what is the ultimate goal of our existence. Archeology may be
considered at the forefront of both the philosophical and scientific world, the only defining feature of
Archaeology from both science and philosophy is that it takes a step back and looks at the past in order to
attempt to understand the future.

Lastly, on the query on the significance of putting a demarcation line between science and
pseudo-science, we contend for its vital role. We believe that the creation of a demarcation line between
science and pseudoscience is highly important. For the reason that this provides a clearer differentiation
between the two. Most of the time, average individuals take pseudoscience as legitimate science, which is
highly destructive in terms of progression of knowledge. We must also acknowledge that the
temperament of actual science and pseudoscience is completely different. To put it lightly, pseudoscience
exerts effort in actually proving their arguments and hypothesis true, while science takes steps to attempt
to disprove their hypothesis. At first these two may look like only approaching the same problem with
different angles and still achieving the same results. But we believe that in terms of assurance and
reliability actual science surpasses pseudoscience due to the fact that over all science follows a strict
methodology to ensure that if the theory or hypothesis is proven to be true, it will be unquestionable and
undeniable, while for pseudoscience one evidence is enough to prove that its claim is true even if it is not
through the scientific method. To conclude, the clear demarcation between science and pseudoscience
may very well create the defining feature to distinguish between fact and fiction in terms of scientific
discovery.

In conclusion, it is evident that the philosophy of science has a vital role in the field of sciences –
on discerning an actual science from fraudulent sciences, addressing crucial concerns in the field,
attending on the shortcomings of science, and importantly in molding the said field to its best to provide
truths and explanations that concerns the natural world, that can aid to the quest of attaining the
indubitable verities.