Report-Scientific Realism in School.pptx

scientific realism

1. Scientific Realism: The case for Scientific Realism Reporter: Gladys O. Real, MAED GenSci Student

2. Scientific realism argues that science aims to provide true descriptions of an objective, mind-independent reality, including both observable and unobservable aspects. It posits that scientific theories, especially successful ones, are not just useful tools for prediction but offer approximate truth about the world

3. This view is supported by arguments like the "no miracles" argument, which suggests that the success of science would be a miracle if our theories weren't at least approximately true.

4. Here's a more detailed look at the case for scientific realism:

5. 1. The Aim of Science: Scientific realists believe that science seeks to understand the true nature of the world, not just to make effective predictions. They argue that the success of scientific theories provides evidence that they are at least approximately true, and that the entities they postulate (like atoms or electrons) are real.

6. 2. Inference to the Best Explanation: A key argument for scientific realism is "inference to the best explanation" or abduction. This approach suggests that if a theory provides a better explanation for observed phenomena than alternative theories, it's reasonable to believe that the theory's claims about unobservable entities are true or approximately true.

7. For example, the success of theories using atoms in explaining various chemical and physical phenomena suggests that atoms are real and have the properties attributed to them by these theories.

8. 3. The "No Miracles" Argument: This argument states that if scientific theories were just useful tools without any truth value, the consistent success of science would be a "miracle". Realists argue that the only plausible explanation for this success is that the theories provide at least an approximate representation of the world.

9. 4. Cumulative Growth of Scientific Knowledge: Scientific realists believe that science progresses by building upon previous successes, preserving the core truths while discarding outdated or inaccurate details. This progressive accumulation of knowledge provides further evidence for the idea that science is uncovering real truths about the world.

10. 5. Addressing Antirealist Challenges: Antirealists argue that scientific theories are just tools for prediction and do not necessarily offer true descriptions of reality. Scientific realists address these challenges by highlighting the success of science and arguing that the best explanation for this success is that our theories provide approximate truth.

11. They also address the problem of changing theories by suggesting that scientific progress involves refining our understanding of the world, not necessarily discarding all previous knowledge.

12. Scientific Realism: Constructive empiricism (CE) and pessimistic meta-induction (PMI) Reporter: Gladys O. Real, MAED GenSci Student

13. Constructive empiricism (CE) and pessimistic meta-induction (PMI) are philosophical viewpoints that offer opposing perspectives on the nature of scientific theories and their relationship to reality. CE, championed by Bas van Fraassen , suggests that the goal of science is to create theories that are empirically adequate (true to observable phenomena) rather than necessarily true about the unobservable. PMI, on the other hand, argues that past successful scientific theories have been found to be false, leading to the conclusion that our current theories, while empirically successful, may also be false.

14. Constructive Empiricism: CE posits that the aim of science is to produce theories that accurately describe observable phenomena, not necessarily theories that are true about the entire structure of the universe. Core Idea:

15. Empirical Adequacy: A theory is considered empirically adequate if it provides a correct account of observable phenomena, even if its claims about unobservable entities or processes are not necessarily true.

16. Acceptance of Theories: Constructive empiricists accept theories based on their empirical adequacy, not on whether they are believed to be true.

17. Contrast with Scientific Realism: CE differs from scientific realism, which holds that our best scientific theories are approximately true about the world, including its unobservable aspects.

18. Pessimistic Meta-Induction: Core Idea: PMI argues that past scientific theories that were once considered successful have been discarded, often due to new discoveries that contradicted them. Argument: PMI suggests that the historical pattern of discarded theories provides reason to believe that our current theories, which also make claims about the unobservable, are likely to be superseded by future theories. Implication: PMI challenges the scientific realist claim that successful theories provide evidence for the truth of their claims about the unobservable. Criticisms of PMI: Some argue that PMI is based on a biased sample of historical theories, as it focuses on theories that were ultimately falsified rather than on the many successful theories that have remained robust. In essence, constructive empiricism focuses on the empirical adequacy of scientific theories, while the pessimistic meta-induction questions the ability of science to arrive at true theories about the unobservable, drawing on the history of discarded theories to support its claim.