PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE

dr. Al Munaawir, Ph.D.

DEPT. OF PATHOLOGY
MEDICAL FACULTY UNIVERSITAS JEMBER
JEMBER
1
PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE :
AN ACADEMIC FIELD WHICH STUDIES THE
PHENOMENON OF SCIENCE

IT WILL ANSWER SOME QUESTIONS :

• WHAT IS A SCIENCE ?
• WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SCIENCE
AND KNOWLEDGE ?
• HOW CAN WE MAKE A VALID SCIENCTIFIC
CONCLUSION ?
• WHAT KIND OF ABILITY/INSTRUMENTS DOES
SOMEONE NEED TO THINK SCIENTIFICALLY ?

2
 WHY

SHOULD WE LEARN
PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE

3
 A DOCTOR IS :
 A CLINICIAN
 A SCIENTIST

• TO TREAT PATIENTS
• TO EVALUATE THE DISEASE
• TO DEVELOP THEIR KNOWLEDGE
TO FIND NEW TECHNIQUES
TO DISCOVER TECHNIQUES

A DOCTOR IS A STUDENT UNTIL HE/SHE DIE

4
 PROBLEM EXAMPLE

TRAFFIC ACCIDENT
TRAUMA TO THE SKULL
SKULL-BASE FRACTURE
3 DAYS

80% SUFFERING FROM

BRAIN INFECTION (ENCEPHALITIS)

QUESTION :
HOW CAN WE PREVENT THE BRAIN INFECTION TO THE
PATIENT WITH SKULL BASE FRACTURE ?
5
• PREVENTIVE ANTIBIOTICS RIGHT
AFTER TRAUMA

• Which Antibiotic ?

6
 PROBLEM SOLVING
1. INDENTIFY THE ETIOLOGY OF THE
BACTERIA.
CULTURE THE CEREBROSPINAL FLUID

2. RESULT : PSEUDOMONAS AEROGINOSA

TEST SENSITIVITY FOR ANTIBIOTICS
3. RESULT : KEDACILIN
CIPROFLOXACIN
QUESTION :
WHICH ONE CAN BE USE AS THE PROPHYLACTIC
7
ANTIBIOTIC ?
ANSWER :
TO REACH THE BRAIN TISSUES,
THE ANTIBIOTIC SHOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO
PENETRATE THE BLOOD BRAINE BARIER (BBB)

• KEDALICILIN CAN PENETRATE THE BBB

• CIPROPLOXACIN CAN NOT PENETRATE
THE BBB

8
CONCLUSION :
• KEDACILIN CAN BE USED AS THE
PREVENTIVE ANTIBIOTIC TO PREVENT
THE BRAIN INFECTION IN SKULL-BASE
FRACTURE AFTER TRAFFIC ACCIDENT

9
ANIMAL KNOWLEDGE TO KEEP ALIVE
SURVIVE
EXIST
ADAM & EVE

HUMAN BEING
A-CREATURE KNOWLEDGE DEVELOPING
WHO IS ABLE TO
o THINK WHICH ONE IS
o FEEL -TRUE/FALSE
o REACT -BAD/GOOD etc
-BEAUTIFUL/UGLY
EXSISTING

GIVE THE MEANING TO LIFE 10

 HUMAN BEING
KNOWLEDGE

o LANGUAGE :-TO COMMUNICATE

-TO INFORM THEIR
WAY THINKING
o LOGICAL RATIONAL THINKING

DEVELOPING

LOGICAL THINKING
o THE ABILITY TO THINK/ A FORM OF
REASONING
11
THINKING/REASONING
 AN ACTIVITY TO FIND THE TRUTH OF KNOWLEDGE
 CRITERIA OF TRUTH : RELATIVE

LOGICAL
BASED ON REASONING

ANALYTICAL
THE WAY OF
THINKING
ILLOGICAL
NOT BASED ON
REASONING
NON-ANALYTICAL

12
BASED ON REASONING :

- LOGIC : ACTIVITY OF THINKING BASED ON

A CERTAIN PATTERN OF REASONING

LOGICAL & ILLOGICAL

DEPENDS ON THE POINT OF VIEW

- ANALYTIC
ACTIVITY OF THINKING BASE ON APPLYING
CERTAIN STEPS/RULES TO ANALYZE A PROBLEM
13
WITH NO REASONING :

 FEELING
 INTUITION
NON-ANALYTIC THINKING ACTIVITY
WITHOUT A CERTAIN PATTERN OF THINKING
 REVELATION

14
 FACT/RATIONALE RATIONALISME

KNOWLEDGE EXPERIENCE EMPIRICALISM

SOURCE

REVELATION BELIEF

15
AN EXAMPLE :

CAUSE OF GETTING DRUNK

PLAIN WATER + WHISKEY DRUNK

PLAIN WATER + WHISKEY + KRETEK DRUNK
PLAIN WATER + PEUYEUM DRUNK
PLAIN WATER + TUAK DRUNK

16
CONCLUSION

CAUSE OF GETTING DRUNK

IS WATER

NOT-VALID

17
 SCIENTIFIC REASONING

TO ANALYZE DEDUCTIVE THINKING

THE VALIDITY (RATIONALISM)

INDUCTIVE THINKING
(EMPIRICALISM)

PRODUCE
KNOWLEDGE

DEDUCTIVE : SPECIFIC CONCLUSION DRAWNFROM

SOME GENERAL STATEMENTS
INDUCTIVE :GENERAL CONCLUSION DRAWN FROM
SOME SPECIFIC STATEMENTS 18
DEDUCTION :
GENERAL SPECIFIC
DEDUCTIVE :
SYLLOGISM OF THINKING
2 STATEMENTS (MAYOR PREMISE, MINOR PREMISE)

MAKE THE CONCLUSION

EXAMPLE OF SYLOGISM :

- ALL CREATURES HAVE EYES

(MAYOR PREMISE)

- HUSIN IS A CREATURE
(MINOR PREMISE) 19
SO : HUSIN HAS EYES

(CONCLUSION)

20
 -ALL CREATURES HAVE EYES

- HUSEIN HAS EYES

21
SO : ALL OF CREATURES ARE HUSEIN

WRONG

22
SHOULD BE :

HUSEIN IS A CREATURE

23
ALL ANIMALS HAVE EYES

HUSEIN HAS EYES

24
CONCLUSION

HUSEIN IS AN ANIMAL

25
A VALID CONCLUSION DEPENDS ON :

1. THE TRUTH OF THE MAJOR PREMISE

2. THE TRUTH OF THE MINOR PREMISE
3. VALIDITY OF MAKING THE CONCLUSION

EXPL.:

-ALL CITIZENS SHOULD PAY THE TAX

- THE POOR ARE CITIZENS

26
SO : THE POOR SHOULD PAY THE
TAX

FALSE

27
 THEORY OF (DEDUCTIVE/
COHERENCE IDEALISM)

CRITERIA THEORY OF (EMPIRICAL)

OF TRUTH CORRESPONDENCE

THEORY OF (PRACTICAL)
PRAGMATICS

28
THEORY OF COHERENCE : (PLATO & ARISTOTELES)

A PROPOSITION MAY BE ACCEPTED AS TRUE IF

IT COHERES WITH OTHER PROPOSITIONS WHICH
ARE KNOWN TO BE TRUE
BUT IT IS NOT SUGGESTED THAT THE TRUTH OF
THESE PROPOSITIONS LIES IN THEIR COHERENCE

EXAMPLE : 3+4 = 7 3 + 4 = 7
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1+1+1+1+1+1+1

MATH IS PROVED BY COHERENCE THEORY.

AXIOM THEOREM
29
 THEORY OF CORRESPONDENCE (BERTRAND RUSSEL
THE CLAIM THAT TRUTH IS :
 IN AGREEMENT WITH REALITY
THAT IS CONSISTS OF A CORRESPONDENCE
BETWEEN A STATEMENT AND THE WAY THINGS ARE
 A RELATIONAL PROPERTY, THAT WHATEVER IS
TRUE (SENTENCE, STATEMENT, PROPOSITION)
IS TRUE BY ITS RELATION TO SOMETHING ELSE,
USUALLY A FACT
EXAMPLE :
THE CAPITAL OF THE REPUBLIK OF INDONESIA
IS JAKARTA
TRUE : BECAUSE THAT STATEMENT
CORRESPONDS WITH THE OBJECT
AS A FACT. 30
THEORY OF PRAGMATICS (CHARLES PIERCE)

IDEAS BECOME TRUE JUST SO FAR AS THEY

HELP US TO GET INTO SATISFACTORY RELATIONS
WITH OTHER PARTS OF OUR EXPERIENCE.
(FOR ACTUAL USE ONLY).

31
 ART (SUBJECTIVE)
 TRIES TO GIVE THE MEANING
OF THE OBJECT
 PERSONAL IN CHARACTER

RELIGION
KNOWLEDGE
 DEPENDS ON FAITH
 GO INTO THE TRANSCENDENTAL
MENTAL WEALTH SPHERE
SCIENCE
 EXTRACTION OF EXPLANATIONS
OF NATURE
 AN INSTRUMENT TO PREDICT AND
TO “CONTROL” THE UNIVERSE
 GENERAL & IMPERSONAL IN
CHARACTER
32
 SOLVING
PROBLEM ANSWER

KNOWLEDGE SOLVING

THE VALID THE VALID

HOW COULD KNOWLEDGE ANSWER
KNOWLEDGE
BE VALID ?
SCIENTIFIC
METHOD
EPISTEMOLOGY
33
 WHAT ? (ONTOLOGY)

HOW ? (EPISTEMOLOGY)
ANY KNOWLEDGE
WHY ?

PURPOSE ? (AXIOLOGY)

RELATIONSHIP TO EACH OTHER

34
EXP.
PHYSICAL
CAUSE CHEMICAL
ETIOLOGY ETC

MECHANISM
SCIENCE
CANCER
CELL CHARACTERISTICS

RADIATION
TREATMENT CHEMOTHERAPY
GEN THERAPY

35
 DEVELOPMENT OF KNOWLEDGE

MYTH & SUPERSTITION

GODS AND GODDESSES

COMMON SENSE
(TRIAL AND ERROR)
o QUANTITATIVE
APPLIED ART o DESCRIPTIVE
o PHENOMENAL
 IRRIGATIONS o NARROW SCOPE
 MONUMENTS o IT DOESN’T
BOROBUDUR DEVELOP
PYRAMID THE THEORY
 TRADITIONAL MEDICINE 36
 COMMON SENSE
(Trial & Error)
 THE BEGINNING OF SCIENCE
 ACCORDING TO RANDELL & BUCHLER
o KNOWLEDGE THROUGH EXPERIENCES
o UNINTENTIONAL
o SPORADIC
 ACCORD TO TITUS
o CHARACTERIZED BY REPETITION/HABIT/TRADITION
o BASICALLY UNCLEAR
o UNTESTED KNOWLEDGE
EXPL : THE SUN GOES AROUND
THE EARTH

37
DOGMATIC
 o WELLS :
THE GREEKS : THE FATHER OF THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD
THE MOSLEMS : THE STEP-FATHER OF THE SCIENTIFIC
METHOD
o ROGER BACON (1214-1294)
INTRODUCED EXPERIMENTAL METHOD IN WESTERN
CIVILZATION
o FRANCIS BACON (1561-1626)
ESTABLISHED THE EXPERIMENTAL METHOD AS A SCIENTIFIC
PARADIGM
AS A RESULT PRODUCED AMMUNITION

38
THE PIONEERS OF DEDUCTIVE & INDUCTIVE THINKING.
o COPERNICUS (1473-1543)
o KEPLER (1571-1630)
o GALILEO (1546-1642)
o NEWTON (1642-1727)
KARL PEARSON (1857-1938)
1890 : THE GRAMMAR OF SCIENCE ABOUT
THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD
SCIENTIST WHO MADE MAJOR DISCOVERIES USING
THE EXPERIMENTAL METHOD :
o HELMHOLTZ
o PASTEUR
o DARWIN
o MAXWELL
1910 : JOHN DEWEY.
“HOW WE THINK”
ABOUT THE STEPS OF THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD39
 SCIENTIFIC METHOD

o A PROCEDURE TO OBTAIN A SCIENCE

METHOD : THE WAY TO KNOW SOMETHING
(SENN) USING THE SYSTEMATIC STEPS

METHODOLOGY : THE INVESTIGATION

OF THE METHODS USED
TO GET RESULTS

EPISTEMOLOGY : HOW TO IMPLEMENT THE METHOD

40
SCIENTIFIC METHOD.

o THE EXPRESSION OF THOUGHT WORK/WAY OF THINKING

o CHARACTERISTICS :
 RATIONAL (DEDUCTIVE, COHERENT)
 TESTED (INDUCTIVE, CORRESPONDS)

A STATEMENT IS TRUE IF SUPPORTED BY THE FACTS

41
 SCIENTIFIC METHOD

o LOGICO-HYPOTHETICO-VERIFICATIVE
o CONTINUOUS CONJUGATION (INTERACTION) BETWEEN
DEDUCTION AND INDUCTION (TYNDALL)

42
 FORMULATE
PROBLEMS THE PROBLEMS

LITERATURE ARRANGEMENT
STUDY OF THE CONCEPTUAL
(LOGIC) FRAMEWORK
ARRANGEMENT OF
THE RELEVANT PREMISES

TEMPORARY FORMULATE
ANSWER THE HYPOTHESIS

VERIFICATION PROVE THE HYPOTHESIS

SCIENTIFIC CONCLUSION
RESEARCH PROCESS NEW THEORY
43
44
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
SCIENCE :
 CAN BE CONSIDERED AS :
A PRODUCT
A PROCESS
AN ETHICAL PARADIGM

 ATTEMPTS TO UNDERSTAND
THE NATURE OR THE PRODUCT/PROCESS

45
CHARACTERISTICS OF SCIENCE ARE :

 HAS THE POWER TO PREDICT

 CAN BE PROVEN

46
TECHNOLOGY :

 AN APPLIED SCIENCE WHICH IS

ALREADY DEVELOPED

 INCLUDES HARDWEAR AND SOFTWEAR

47
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY HAS THE POWER
TO DOMINATE NATURE, HUMAN BEING,
AND CIVILIZATION

48
SCIENCE AS A PROCESS :
 IS A SOCIAL ACTIVITY
 ATTEMPTS TO UNDERSTAND THE NATURE,
HUMAN BEINGS AND THEIR BEHAVIOURS
WHATEVER THEY ARE
SCIENTIFIC METHOD HAS CHARACTERIS TICS:
 RATIONAL
 OBJECTIVE

49
SCIENCE AS A PRODUCT :
 ALL KNOWLEDGE WHICH IS PRODUCED
THROUGH THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD BELONG TO
THE PUBLIC
 SCIENCE IS LIMITED TO FORMULATIONS
AND STATEMENTS, WHICH ARE AGREED UPON
BY ALL SCIENTISTS
SUBJECT TO PROOF SO, A THEORY
AT ANY TIME COULD BE ABROGATED

50
SCIENCE AS AN ETHICAL PARADIGM
ACCORDING TO MERTON,
SCIENCE IS A SOCIETY WHICH HOLDS
TO FOUR NORMS :
 UNIVERSALISM
 COMMUNALISM
 DISINTERESTEDNESS
 SKEPTICAL

51
 UNIVERSALISM :
 IS NOT DEPENDENT UPON : • RACE
• SKIN COLOR
• CIVILIZATION/RELIGION
 COMMUNALISM :
• SCIENCE BELONGS TO THE PUBLIC
 DISINTERESTEDNESS :
• SCIENCE IS NOT FOR PROPAGANDA OR
PUBLICITY
 SKEPTICAL:
• TRUTHS ARE NOT AUTOMATICALLY RECEIVED
WITHOUT EVIDENCE

52
TECHNOLOGY :

GOAL :  TO SOLVE PRACTICAL PROBLEMS

 TO OVERCOME DIFFICULTIES THAT
PEOPLE ARE FACED WITH
OFTERS SOME ALTERNATIVES
TO OVERCOME PROBLEMS

53
FRANCIS BACON :
• SCIENCE IS POWER
• TECHNOLOGY IS THE TOOL OF POWER

54
 POWER OVER HUMAN-BEINGS

• EXPERIENCED BY UNDER-DEVELOPED
COUNTRIES
• TECHNOLOGY IS CONTROLLED BY DEVELOPED
COUNTRIES

55
POWER OVER CULTURE
 TECHNOLOGY INFLUENCES TRADITIONAL
CULTURE
e.g. VIA TELEVISION

POWER OVER NATURE

 WITH TECHNOLOGY, MAN CAN DESTROY
IT’S OWN SPECIES

56
SCIENCE FROM A MORAL PERSPECTIVE

 SCIENCE TRIES TO EXPRESS A REALITY

AS A FACT (DAS SEIN)
 MORALS BASICALLY INDICATE
WHAT ONE SHOULD DO WITH THEIR LIFE
(DAS SOLLEN)

57
SCIENCE AND MORALITY ARE CATEGORIZED
AS KNOWLEDGE, SO THEY :
HAVE : 3 COMPONENTS
• ONTOLOGY
• EPISTEMOLOGY
• AXIOLOGY
THE ANALYSIS OF THE RELATIONSHIP
BETWEEN SCIENCE AND MORAL SHOULD
BE BASED ON THOSE 3 COMPONENTS

58
ONTOLOGY
 SCOPE/BORDER OF THE OBJECT
 INTERPRETATION OF THE ESSENCE
OF REALITY (METAPHYSIC) OF THE OBJECT
EPISTEMOLOGY :
 HOW TO GET AND TO ARRANGE THE OBJECT
OF SCIENCE AS A BODY OF KNOWLEDGE

AXIOLOGY
 THE PRINCIPLES OF THE USE OF A SCIENCE

59
 ONTOLOGICAL APPROACH
 ONTOLOGICALLY, SCIENCE IS LIMITED
ONLY TO THE RANGE OF HUMAN EXPERIENCES
 THE SCOPE OF SCIENCE THAT IS EMPIRICAL IN
CHARACTER, IS CONSISTENT WITH THE
EPISTEMOLOGY OF SCIENCE THAT ANY
CONCLUSIONS SHOULD BE VERIFIED
SCIENTIFICALLY (DEDUCTIONS WHICH ARE
VERIFIED AND FREE FROM DOGMATIC VALUES)

EINSTEIN :
SCIENCE STARTS WITH THE FACT, AND
END WITH FACT, NO MATTER THE
VARIETY OF THEORIES IN BETWEEN
60
 METAPHYSIC (WHICH IS BASED ON
REALITY = DAS SEIN) REFUSE TO INCORPORATE
MORAL PREMISES WHICH ARE NECESSITY
IN CHARACTER (DAS SOLLEN)

IT SHOULD BE :
SCIENCE SHOULD BE THE TOOL TO REALIZE
THE MORAL ASPECT OF THE GOAL

61
17 PRINCIPLES OF MORALITY IN SCIENCE
EPISTEMOLOGI SCIENTIFIC METHOD

MORAL ASPECTS
1. SEEKS THE TRUTH
2. SHOULD BE DONE HONESTY
3. WITHOUT SELF-INTEREST
4. BASED ON ARGUMENTS
5. BELIEF IN RATIONAL THINKING
6. BELIEF IN OBJECTIVE VERIFICATION
7. BASED ON THE CRITICAL THINKING
IN MAKING OF CONCLUSIONS
8. FREE/OPEN TO CRITICISM
9. PRAGMATIC
10. DOESN’T CHANGE GOD’S WILL
FOR HUMAN BEINGS/HUMAN NATURE
62
ONTOLOGY EMPIRICAL
(DAS SEIN)

MORAL ASPECTS
11. NO ABRIDGEMENT OF
HUMAN VALUES
12. NO INTERFERENCE IN
HUMAN LIFE
13. NEUTRAL FROM DOGMATIC
VALUES

63
AXIOLOGY UTILIZATION

MORAL ASPECTS
RAISES THE STANDARD OF
LIVING WHICH TAKES INTO ACCOUNT
14. HUMAN NATURE
15. HUMAN VALUE
16. BALANCE/CONSERVATION
OF THE ENVIRONMENT
17. COMMUNAL & UNIVERSAL

64
Philosophy of Medicine: Models of Medical
Knowledge and Practice
 Biomedic Model, Art, Holistic
• Hipocrates, Galen: “Teori Humoral”
• Abad 16-17an: Andreas Vesalius and
William Harvey.
• Abad 19: “sellular dan molecular”
• Biomedic Model
• Art of Medicine
• Holistic
 Biomedic Vs Humanistic
Metaphysics

Metaphysics Epistemology Ethics

Biomedical Mechanistic Objective Emotionally

model monism knowledge detached
concern

Humanistic Dualism/holism Subjective Empathic care

models knowledge