Analyzing Helen Longino's View Of The Scientific Method

Do you remember when you were a child? Close your eyes and think back to what it was like. Do you remember the adults who were in your life? Did they tell you what to do all of the time? Do you remember obeying to their every word? Or did you decide to rebel? I know I did at times. But why did we do it? Why did we choose to be defiant? Were we bad children? These are some of my questions I sought to find out.

The Scientific Method is represented by a reasonable order of steps used to come across a conclusion obtained by an experiment or attentive observations. There are five orderly steps which are the following; asking a question or stating the problem, creating a hypothesis, conduct an experiment, evaluate the results, and create a conclusion. A method used by scientists to find an answer a question or the solution to a problem. Now, let’s take a closer look of what each of these five steps consist of.

Longino suggests four ways to maintain objectivity. First, “recognized avenues for criticism,” which is recorded data of conversations or meetings discussing theories. Second, scientific investigation must be able to promote evaluations. Third, the community must take part in analytical discussions which will lead to changes in the education program teaches. Lastly, information given by the community of scientist must not be over ruled by the people’s influence who hold power in the

There are two main ideas, or perspectives are held, objective and subjective. Objective information is not influenced by personal feelings. Objective knowledge represents facts. Subjective knowledge is based on personal feelings and opinions. People look for truths, or proofs and have theories of how the universe works.

The above view is expressed in many different ways: that there is no scientific knowledge that we should not want to have for

The scientific method continues to be misrepresented in public schools all over the world. Students are being taught that there is a beginning and an end to the scientific method, and that everything in between is protocol and must be followed chronologically. “Ask a question, do some research, come up with a hypothesis, conduct an experiment, understand your data, make your conclusion!” a grade six science teacher will tell their students. “It’ll be on your quiz!”. However, what those students are not being taught is that the scientific method has never been, and will never be a linear process. Scientists constantly revisit different steps of the process in order to better understand the subject matter; sometimes it can take many years to

To support the theory of continental drift is through topography, surveying the floors of oceans, charts of rock magnetism, and statistics on rock ages (Trefil & Hazen, 2010). At one time scientist believed that the deep ocean floors were flat; accumulating the sediment that progressively wore away from the prehistoric landmasses (Trefil & Hazen, 2010). However, they discovered steep-walled valleys and elevated highlands. This was evidences that just as the continents are transformed and are active, so to is the seafloor (Trefil & Hazen, 2010). The Mid- Atlantic Ridge, positioned in the central part of the Atlantic Ocean, is recorded to be the longest mountain range on this planet. Volcanoes, lava flow, and earthquakes are a source of

Positivism or more specifically, logical positivism, is “maintained that science is value free, independent of the scientist, and obtained using objective methods” (McEwen & Wills, 2007, p.8). This leads to no biased interpretation of the data. In summary, objectivity and facts are the basis of received view.

I support the idea that scientists’ theories cannot be completely objective, because scientist are people and everyone has opinions and biases not matter what they say. An example of this in the article would be how Blumenbach’s teacher, Linnaeus had his basic four classifications for humans in which had characterized them by their color, humor, and posture. His biased views really

Knowledge, the key to progress, has proven to be a human being’s most powerful and significant weapon. We gain knowledge when we put our brain to work at the problems we need to solve in life. It doesn’t matter what we are trying to accomplish, whether it be creating a new technology or learning how to put together a puzzle, the matter of fact is that both request great examination and research to resolve and learn. Scientific research is a technique used to investigate phenomena, correct previous understanding, and acquire new knowledge. Knowledge could lead us to a possible cure for cancer, an alternative for fossil fuels, and the creation of a revolutionary technology. Nevertheless, all these benefits are a reason why

The Scientific Method is the approach that scientists use to investigate some phenomena. It’s a standard technique to find cause and effect of a particular problem.

The Scientific Method is the standardized procedure that scientists are supposed to follow when conducting experiments, in order to try to construct a reliable, consistent, and non-arbitrary representation of our surroundings. To follow the Scientific Method is to stick very tightly to a order of experimentation. First, the scientist must observe the phenomenon of interest. Next, the scientist must propose a hypothesis, or idea in which the experiments will be based around. Then, through repeated experimentation, the hypothesis can either be proven false or become a theory. If the hypothesis is proven to be false, the scientist must reformulate his or her ideas and come up with another hypothesis, and the experimentation begins again. This

The general definition of science is the systematic study of the physical and natural world through observation and experiments. On the contrary, it is much more than that. Much like art, it holds a sense of subjectivity. It is an abstract paradigm that requires the input of one’s personal beliefs and values to help it progress. It is much more than just facts and theories of how the world works, but also a prime representation of the ethics and beliefs of the scientists that help mold it today. Science is a database for factual knowledge on the natural world, furthermore, it also incorporates the environment it has created. The environment consists of the particular people, behaviors, and struggles of the scientific community. Even though science incorporates many thoughts and ideas, it does not contain other ideas. Science does not hold a moral category. It does not define what is considered right and what is considered wrong. It merely provides information on certain ideas for further understanding. Any theories and applications of it can lead to other subjects. This idea also applies to what the acquired scientific knowledge is used for. Even though the ideas of complexity and subjectivity are present in both science and art, the concept of aesthetic should only be important for art. Despite requiring organization and general cleanliness, science does not need to pass the eye test. Science should be represented through proper data and its analysis and the non factual features need to have a rational reasoning. To judge or base an idea on its appeal does not equal to

As people, we come with earlier knowledge and understandings on subjects and topics of study, “Science” being one of them. We make presumptions, based on either reasonable evidence or that our thoughts and ideas are known as true by others. Through this we have come to understand and define science as its aims, leaving its definition, whether consciously or unconsciously, unchallenged. We have taken advantage of the label that we have set for science, as well as its goals, and failed to look at them further.

Feminist interaction with the philosophy of science, and in particular a feminist interpretation of epistemology, concerns the extent to which bias influences and shapes knowledge within the scientific community, and means to rectify this. There are three main distinctions of feminist philosophy of science - feminist empiricism, standpoint theory, and postmodernism. I am to be comparing and contrasting two of the three, specifically feminist standpoint theory and empiricism. I shall argue that standpoint theory and empiricism are both legitimate methods for feminist epistemology, yet standpoint theory is a more applicable and plausible method for the analysis of science in particular. I will first explain the main tenets of the feminist philosophy of science, going on to then explain reasons why standpoint theory and postmodernism are legitimate tools of analysis in their own right, and then evaluate their legitimacy.