Episode 63: Theory Laden Character of Science: Social & Personal Factors

Loading...

From the course by University of Alberta

Science & Religion 101

34 ratings

University of Alberta

Science & Religion 101

34 ratings

This course examines the nature of both science and religion and attempts to explore the possible relationships between them. The primary purpose is to dispel the popular myth that science and religion are entrenched in a never-ending conflict. As a result, this course argues that if the limits of both science and religion are respected, then their relationship can be complementary. Topics include: Science and Religion Categories and Foundational Principles, Definitions of Science and Religion, Science-Religion Models and Relationships, Intelligent Design and Natural Revelation, the Galileo Affair, Geology and Noah’s Flood, Evolution and Darwin’s Religious Beliefs, the Modern “Evolution” vs. “Creation” Debate, the Problem of Evil, and Interpretations of the Biblical Accounts of Origins in Genesis 1-11. The course employs a Constructive Teaching Style in order that students can develop their personal views on the relationship between science and religion and on each of the topics listed above. St. Joseph's College is a Catholic, undergraduate, liberal arts college on the University of Alberta campus. It is an independent institution that is affiliated with the University of Alberta.

From the lesson

What Is Science?

In continuing with our exploration of the terms Science and Religion, this week we introduce five different definitions of science using historical examples—prehistoric science, Egyptian and Mesopotamian science, Greek science, modern science, and post-modern science. Notably, we will note that science has powerfully impacted religion throughout history. Like that of religion, the academic definition of science is wide. In particular, it has been intimately/inevitably connected to metaphysical beliefs. This section also outlines Critical Realism. This is philosophy of science embraced by a majority of Science and Religion scholars.

Episode 45: Key Thoughts5:05

Episode 46: Conceptions of Science: Ancient Space4:22

Episode 47: Prehistoric Science & Oral Tradition4:49

Episode 48: The Account of Origins in Oral Traditions: Is It Science?4:54

Episode 49: The Account of Origins in Oral Traditions: Is It Science? (Continued)4:25

Episode 50: The Account of Origins in Oral Traditions: Is It Science? (Conclusion)4:08

Episode 51: Oral Tradition & Genesis 1-114:24

Episode 52: Oral Tradition & Genesis I-II (Continued)5:11

Episode 53: Oral Tradition & Message-Incident Principle4:20

Episode 54: Egyptian & Mesopotamian Science5:48

Episode 55: Egyptian & Mesopotamian Science (Continued)8:04

Episode 56: Greek Science5:07

Episode 57: Conclusion: Ancient Science. Modern Science4:32

Episode 58: The Peak of Scientism5:20

Episode 59: The Peak of Scientism (Continued)4:48

Episode 60: The Peak of Scientism (Conclusion). Post-Modernity & Anti-Realism4:13

Episode 61: Early 20th Century Scientific Discoveries. Categories of Anti-Realism4:03

Episode 62: Critical Realism: Between Scientism & Anti-Realism4:40

Episode 63: Theory Laden Character of Science: Social & Personal Factors5:03

Episode 64: Excursus: Critical Realism - A New Philosophy of Science5:13

Episode 65: Conclusion: John Polkinghorne & Critical Realism5:06

Episode 66: Conclusion: What is Science? Toward a Working Definition of Science (Lamoureux)6:07

Hermeneutics 5: Dynamic Equivalent Translation4:52

Hermeneutics 6: Sufficiency & Proficiency2:47

Hermeneutics 7: Implicit Scientific Concepts6:08

Meet the Instructors

Denis Lamoureux
Associate Professor
St. Joseph's College

Episode 63.

Let's look more specifically at the theory laden character of science

with regards to social factors.

Science is practiced within a scientific community.

And this community embraces a paradigm.

In other words, there is a foundational theory that all scientists accept.

For example, evolution is the paradigm accepted by biologists today.

As a consequence, new scientific data is filtered through the paradigm.

And in this way the paradigm directs the interpretation of the data.

Society at large is another social factor.

Science is influenced by the social needs and the values of our society.

For example, the discovery of the telescope in 1609 was for

military purposes, so enemies could be seen sooner.

Space travel in the 1960s was influenced by the US USSR Cold War.

And even the Internet, first arose for the military.

Sadly, it seems we are at our most creative when we are at war with one

another.

To be sure, social factors influence science but

there are no post-modern excesses.

Science does not equal sociology.

Scientific discoveries and revolutions do occur.

For example,

science moved from geocentricity to heliocentricity in the 17th century.

Why is this the case?

It is because the physical world dictates the discoveries of science.

It must be noted that society can retard or

accelerate the pace of scientific discovery.

But society does not control scientific truth, why?

Again, it's because the physical world dictates to us the facts of nature.

Personal factors also contribute to the theory laden character of science.

Science is practiced by fallible and limited people.

In addition, science is influenced by human values and judgement.

For example, in physics, beauty and parsimony, that is,

the idea of simplicity, are values that are used in formulating theories.

When a mathematical formula is beautiful and

parsimonious, there's a good chance it is true.

It's important to underline that science is not only the application

of strict logic.

It also includes personal judgement and

the operation of sonnet, that is tacit, categories.

This is often called the art of science.

Let me offer some examples.

Personal skill is defined as the application of several rules which are not

known as such by the person following them.

For example,

when you are riding a bike, are you aware you adjust the curvature of your bicycle's

path in proportion to the ratio of your unbalance over the square of your speed?

I sure don't.

Or, another example is language.

Are you aware of the rules of grammar when you speak?

and this is also the case when working in a lab.

Scientists learn by example of authority.

Just being surrounded by other scientists is influencing us

in ways that we are not fully aware.

It is like an intellectual osmosis.

Personal intuition is another factor influencing science.

It includes so call flashes of genius, illuminating insights and hunches.

These don't arise from the simple use of logic.

An excellent example of this is when Einstein at only 16 years of age

gets an intuition about the theory of relativity.

The theory did not arrive through the application of strict logic.

Einstein comments about this intuition in supplementary quote 12.

To the surprise of many people, personal trust plays a significant role in science.

Scientists trust and believe that the physical world really exists.

This is a belief in realism.

And that we're not trapped in a computer program like in the movie the Matrix.

They also believe in the paradigm of their scientific discipline

in order to set up experiments.

And scientists trust the laws of nature and the reputability.

In particular, scientists trust that no god, or gods, or

demons, tinker with natural processes.

To be sure, personal factors influence science, but

there are no post-modern excesses.

Science does not equal a personal whatever.

Why?

Again it's because the physical world dictates to us the facts of nature and

it even shape our skills, intuition and trust.

End of episode.

Explore our Catalog

Join for free and get personalized recommendations, updates and offers.

Coursera provides universal access to the world’s best education, partnering with top universities and organizations to offer courses online.

© 2019 Coursera Inc. All rights reserved.

Download on the App Store

Get it on Google Play