Term
|
Definition
| it is possible to to prove something wrong. I take this to mean that a theory is falsifiable if there are things you can think of that, if they were shown to actually happen, would make the theory false. QUESTION: is this the idea that if one thing doesnt fit the theory, we must throw the whole thing out? or was that something else? |
|
|
Term
| Demarcation between science theories and non-science theories: |
|
Definition
| falsifiability is the line of demarcation: science can be proven wrong (falsifiability), non-scientific theories cant. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Is the stage when you conclude a final result base on empirical information. For example: Frog no. 1 is green. Frog no 2 is green. Frog no 3 is green, Conclusion: All frogs are green. This theory was made by David Hume, but Popper created something call The problem with Induction in this, he explained that there is no way we can possibly predict the future with empirical information. the example that he uses was, if the sun rises everyday, how do we know is going to rise tomorrow. His answer for this problem is that even though we can formulate a theory that explains that the sun will rises, and if the sun does not rises one that, then the theory will be falsify and replace with a new one. |
|
|
Term
| Tacit knowing (we know more than we can tell) |
|
Definition
| - the distinction between our awareness as a whole and awareness of details |
|
|
Term
| Focal and subsidiary knowledge: |
|
Definition
| Focal: isolated and in focus exclusively; Subsidiary: background; not particularly in focus but making a necessary contribution to the whole |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Theories describe how the universe really works. Science is not just a model. + Van Frassens article: Science aims to give us, in its theories, a literally true story of what the world is like; and acceptance of a scientific theory involves the belief that it is true. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Theories describes observations but not as creation really is, Science is just a model; We can accept theories because they fit the phenomena, not necessarily because we think theyre absolutely true. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Very similar to anti-realism - Van Frassens description: Science aims to give us theories which are empirically adequate; and acceptance of a theory involves as belief only that it is empirically adequate. If it works well, its a good theory - practical |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| as long as our experiments give us useful results, the theory is good as an instrument and that is all we can say |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| if empirical data supports a theory, the theory does not necessarily have to be good to be true (do you mean true to be good?) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The appearance of truth (we think we know whats going on). |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| universally recognized scientific achievements that for a time provide model problems and solutions to a community of practitioners |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| you can shift your view from one paradigm to another without a change in data |
|
|
Term
| Development by accumulation - |
|
Definition
| Scientific development is due to the accumulation of individual ideas and small discoveries made by many different people over time, adding up to an ever-growing stockpile of knowledge that we call scientific knowledge. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Is a change on the basic assumptions made by the paradigm that rule the theories in science. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| empirical results outside the expectation of paradigm which can shake the foundations of the current paradigm |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| caused by many anomalies - can be solved within current paradigm, left for later, or lead to a paradigm shift/scientific revolution |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| the name for the general activity of gaining knowledge and trying to understand the phenomena of the world |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| paradigms cannot be compared because they are created within a particular set of values, methods, and assumptions |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The replacement of an old, dented paradigm with a new one, around which the discipline then organizes itself and within which scientific investigation is conducted. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| true for all, free of any personal bias. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| observation based, collected factual data. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| go from facts to generalities |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| go from generalities to specific or particular things |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Study of the nature of the entity - (ex: a rock wants to fall back to earth) - based on the notion of purpose |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| regular occurrences, behavior, description of both, universal in scope |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Laws that describe observed phenomena but does not fully entail reality formulated by scientists |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| hypothetical/idealized i.e. ideal gas law |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The study of knowledge; how we know something |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| the nature of what there is; the way things are |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| method(s) of knowing/discovering, aka, deduction and induction. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| this is the stand that Polkinghorne defends. It means that both science and religion are looking for the same answer. And they both also address problems in the same reality |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| is the idea that a point of view can be considerably wrong. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| the lens through which we see the world |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| a thing assumed beforehand in an argument or debate usually |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| science as a discipline and theoretically (see below) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| science is systematic and comprehensive, has characteristic methods, addresses specific questions, advances specific answers, and carries results with it |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| science deals essentially with abstract entities, theoretical processes, and is more concerned with understanding than the practicalities |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| ignoring personal feeling or belief and look at something for what it is |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| makes sense, use reason/logic with evidence to make sense |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| needs evidence to be proved |
|
|
Term
| Definition of natural science - |
|
Definition
| Ratzsch says that there is no definition that could accurately portray it |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| must look at everything completely unbiased |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| go from facts to generalities |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| account for a theory with less than the amount of evidence needed for proof or certainty |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| using initial conditions and a law to deduce something that will happen |
|
|
Term
| Covering-law model of explanation - |
|
Definition
| after testing something, the law covers the explanation and makes it work |
|
|
Term
| Hypothetical-deductive testing - |
|
Definition
| hypothesis ? deduce outcome ? experiment ? accept or reject hypothesis |
|
|
Term
| Positivism and its implications - |
|
Definition
| only rational, objective, and empirical exist - if you cant see it, it doesnt exist |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| very strong positivist - developed falsifiability and the line of demarcation - |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| science is becoming interlinked with non-empirical factors which clashes with falsifiability and makes it impossible to do |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| the unrealistic belief in or pursuit of perfection |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| argues that there is some uniformity - if we know the structures of the mind and perception in detail, we can know some things about any experience we will ever have |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| the component parts of a whole mechanism meld into such a unity that even the nature of the parts themselves is affected by that unity |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| symbolic generalizations, metaphysical commitments, values, exemplars |
|
|
Term
| Communal aspect of science - |
|
Definition
| peoples ability to fully understand each others scientific pronouncements which keeps science honest |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| truth and knowledge are not absolute, but are relative to the time and culture that they are in |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| holders of different paradigms cannot make the same observations, they have a different perception |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| every observation or fact you have is subjective (influenced by your paradigm). This is opposite of Bacon who believed in objectiveness (unbiased) |
|
|
Term
| Postmodern views of science - |
|
Definition
| there is an independent and objective reality , there is only one metanarrative, each human is an independent center of reasoning, and that science has a perspective that can lead us closer to the truth of the metanarrative |
|
|
Term
| Incredulity towards metanarratives - |
|
Definition
| a way someone defined postmodern views - unbelief in metanarratives |
|
|
Term
| Problems with Kuhnianism - |
|
Definition
| incommensurability and perception |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Empirically accurate, consistent, broad in scope, simple, and fruitful |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Maxi = well established theories confirmed by multiple groups (periodic table) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Empirically accurate, consistent, broad in scope, simple, and fruitful |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| provides a systematic account of some portion of the natural realm |
|
|
Term
| Why theories cannot be proven true - |
|
Definition
| in the future, there might be an experiment that proves the theory false |
|
|
Term
| Why theories cannot be proven false - |
|
Definition
| possibility of machine error, background theories are flawed since they cannot be proved true |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| hard - our theories are or can be completely and literally true |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| although realism is correct, not everything in any given theory is to be taken literally |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| meant to convey truth but a truth that is neither a purely literal rendition of our statement, nor having to do with just observational matters, nor subjective truth (influenced by paradigm |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| our theories are gaining more and more verisimilitude and continue to get closer to the truth |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| ontological - denies reality holds any hidden structures or that humans produce them |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| theoretical terms do not refer to real things and if theoretical statements are true, it is with observable matters |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| there is little chance that our human theories are right and there is no way of ever finding out what the theoretical truth really is |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Everything can be broken down to basic science |
|
|
Term
| Why a need for a theology of science? |
|
Definition
| Christianity and science can mix. For morris and Petcher Christianity needs to be the basis and foundation for conducting all of science. Under two themes, embracing the gospel and shunning idolatry. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| God had the freedom to create and manipulate the world in whatever way He saw fit. Therefore, in order to understand the world we have to study it. We cant just use our own logic and reasoning to theorize it, since Gods creation of the world was not constrained to logic and reasoning. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| skeptical of everything - everything can be doubted, even what we perceive with our senses. Broke down his beliefs until he found something that he could say was absolute truth (I am thinking, therefore I exist), then from those truths he wanted to use reasoning to develop more truths until he had a new construct of beliefs that were absolutely true. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Father of the scientific method; Suspend any knowledge of purpose or final causes; instead simply observe repeatedly and draw inferences - empirical knowledge; skeptical of the ability of human reasoning to discover truth (in contrast to Descartes view); objectivity |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| using the specific to describe the general (?) |
|
|
Term
| Enlightenment project & two pillars of scientific inquiry - |
|
Definition
| Enlightenment Project: An attempt to find a way toward knowledge through human capabilities. Overly human centered somewhat anti-religious. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| God is a retired engineer. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Skeptical - argues that we cant prove cause and effect, which is a foundation of scientific method. How can we be sure what the cause of something actually is? Can our experiences accurately describe truth? Can we trust our senses to tell us what is actually happening? |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| wanted knowledge to be universal and scientific - maintain the Enlightenment ideas. In opposition to Humes skepticism: We can have science in terms of universal human reasoning and mental capability - whether or not we can actually describe our observations, all humans are capable of making similar observations so our descriptions are sufficient - we shape reality around us |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| our view of the world is shaped as much by our own personal convictions (which differ from person to person) as it is by reason or experience. Nothing is totally objective - there is no neutral ground. Bacons objectivity doesnt really exist. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Gods intervention in natural law in a way that may surprise us. conspicuous event used to authenticate God or His chosen servant |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| laws that govern creation are covenantal in nature. Creation answers directly to God, who upholds it. As a result, creation is not just a big machine; rather, we should expect that it hold surprises that we will never entirely uncover or comprehend. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| deduction primarily - essentialism? Yes to both |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Only material entities are real; only matter matters |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Creation is a machine that, once set into motion, is self-sufficient by its governing laws. Put into place in the beginning by a legislator - this sounds a lot like deism to me |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| An occasional conformist (?) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| the way God works to uphold and sustain creation |
|
|
Term
| Beyond this we need not go (p131) - |
|
Definition
| We can assert that God is fully operative, and also creation is fully operative in all that occurs. Whenever we try to go behind the scenes of creation that God has revealed to us, we will eventually reach limits. We are not able to understand all of Gods ways. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| our finite view of Gods laws (God is not bound by laws - somehow this is connected?) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| the study of the purpose of things (?) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| creation is dependent on God = God could have chosen to make creation differently |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| God will be faithful in upholding and sustaining creation |
|
|
Term
| Objective & subjective subjective: |
|
Definition
| open to interpretation of the observer. Objectivity: truth is obtained without any kind of bias or personal belief, purely empirical. |
|
|
