The Social Structure Of Science

Fahnestock investigates how original science writing is primarily devoted to presenting facts and assumes the audience has relevant background knowledge and understands the significance. Conversely, accommodated writings shift the genre to become epideictic and thus neglect addressing facts, instead focus on emphasizing the importance of a discovery. One reason Fahnestock provides for the shift in genre is in order for an audience to realize the significance of a discovery accommodators must ensure the audience is able to accept a fact and align it according with existing beliefs. To ensure they are successful, Fahnestock argues that accommodators rely on

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.

Replication, external review, and data recording and sharing, are important to the scientific method because it helps support the hypothesis even more. By replicating the experiment and sharing the data, it increases the validity of the experiment. Semmelweis included these concepts in his experiment by repeating the experiment multiple times, he showed a third party (other scientists) his experiment, and he shared his data and results to multiple sources, but scientists dismissed it.

Grinnell explains that when scientists make a discovery, they cannot claim it as a scientific fact until they have convinced the scientific community of its legitimacy; therefore, a discovery that has not entered the second conversation of Grinnell’s cyclical model is only a proto-scientific claim. This distinction is an extension of Grinnell’s argument regarding subjectivity and inter-subjectivity. Furthermore, when a scientist make a discovery, it is deemed as proto-scientific since its interpretation could have been influenced by the scientist’s subjective experience; however, once the scientific community inter-subjectively agrees on the legitimacy of the claim, it becomes scientific. Credibility is the process by which this transformation

On Tuesday the 20th of September, a presentation was required of all students to show a video of individual experiments after a week was given on the day of the original assigning. Given the task of performing an experiment in order to become acquainted with the Scientific method, students of Biology 621A were required to record their experimentations in full - providing a question to be answered, constructing a hypothesis, designing an experiment that would aid in the proving (or disproving) of the hypothesis and collecting the data found from the experiment. These would go on to be graded based on their overall presentation quality, and content in regards to the mastery of the scientific method while proving its functionality and existence in scientific experiments no matter how small, while determining factors like independent or dependant variables.

Empiricists believe that you gain knowledge through experience, however, what our experiences are telling us can also be lies. Bertrand Russell made up the term “sense data” to explain what our experiences really are. Russell’s explanation of sense data inevitably leads to bigger skeptical worries that seem unanswerable. Russell presents strong arguments for skepticism and then ultimately dodges them with the use of the law of parsimony. Russell’s response to his argument lacks luster and falls short, his argument should have left him a skeptic.

The Stanoviches stated that the practice of relying on observations is empiricism, and that throughout history some scientist would ignore the evidence that they observed. They stated that the observations must also be written down every time in order to have valid documentation. These claims and observations are casual in nature when they choose one type of method over another. The Stanoviches want teachers to know that when the teachers are deciding on an instructional practice that they must make sure that it exposes they underlying structure to the world. They also want teachers to know that the “experimental method” is an essential part of making inferences about instructional programs. (Stanovich, 2003)

The article discusses the increasing trend of conducting replications, as opposed to novel idea studies Additionally, the article highlights that replications are becoming more common and can lead to debunking and discrediting another’s work. Unfortunately, with the focus being on replication, the time spent conducting and exploring new knowledge is consequently reduced. However, it is also suggested that replications provide accountability for scientists to ensure their work is of high quality. Questions to discuss in class: What do we think is the ultimate goal of conducting a replication versus an original study? How can scientists ensure that as a field, the

The journal is peer reviewed and published at the University of Oxford, so the resource is credible. The sole purpose of this article is to show how scientists

Within the last century scientific discovery has been growing at an exponential rate. Evolution, genetics, physics, and chemistry have all greatly affected the way people view the universe and human role in it. Furthermore, the application of scientific discoveries has physically changed society. For example, humans went from being flightless to eighty years later having transportation in super sonic jets available. Rapid scientific change has caused many issues surrounding morality and science to arise. The idea behind the skepticism is that just because something can be done doesnt mean it should be. Nuclear weapons, biological weapons, and cloning have all fallen under fire due to this concept. People worry that

Positivism is a rigorous and formal way to collect and analyze data that was developed around the 1960’s by Auguste Comte (1798-1857) who is also credited with formalizing it. Studies are clear and straight forward and researchers believe that there is only one method that all sciences should rely on. Positivism believes

‘The Ultimate protection against research error and bias is supposed to come from the way scientists constantly test and retest each others results’ – To What extent would you agree with this claim in the natural and human sciences.

Why do young bright minds of India want to take up science or research as a promising career path in the first place? Doesn’t it feel like a risk? What career opportunities does one have after getting a PhD? These questions are bugging me quite a lot these days. For most of us, born and brought up in middle class urban society are taught right from the start to work hard and be well educated enough to secure a good job. Seemingly it is the gateway to lead a comfortable life. I think in India it is the most important thing in life. Getting a decent job. It’s the only thing that matters. No matter how creative you are and harbor any kind of alternate ambitions otherwise it becomes secondary after a point. So growing up, the thought of pursuing science and research could only be such a far-fetched dream for many of us I guess.

Before Einstein, Scientists believed that light waves travelled through a medium called ether. Einstein proved that ether was irrelevant and that light doesn’t travel through a medium. Einstein proved this by figuring out that the speed of light was constant, and in order for ether to be the medium light waves travel through, the speed of light would change depending on the observer. This discovery was one piece of the Specific Theory of Relativity.

Dans ce texte, il s 'agit dans un premier temps de présenter d 'une façon générale le néo-institutionnalisme en tant que courant de pensée afin de le situer plus ou moins dans son contexte d 'apparition et notamment pour comprendre quel type d 'approche il se propose d 'être.