Chips - L9 - Logical Positivism PDF

Preview

Summary

Determining the scientific criteria, and if psychological is able to be classed as a science through looking at logical positivism....

Description

Conceptual and historical issues in psychology Lecture 9 : 09/11/2020 Is Psychology a science? : Logical Positivism Philosophy of science The philosophy of science includes questions such as: -

What constitutes as a science, or pseudoscience? Which scientific method should be used? What progresses occur within science? How can we prove the truth of theories?

First of all, what is science? Every individual has a certain view of what makes a science, some say science is anything that can be proven true, proven false or proven useful.

Is Psychology a science? There is heavy debate, both within and outside of the psychological field, as to whether Psychology qualifies as a scientific field or not. Some claim Psychology is purely scientific, others that it is not scientific at all, and others reach a middle ground by saying that Psychology has parts that are scientific and are not scientific.

The historical roots of logical positivism -

-

-

Began with the rise of empiricism, the idea that truth about the external environment is based upon sensory information and positive evidence. Devised largely by Francis Bacon and David Hume. Positivism itself was devised by August Comte and stated that the new basis for society is no longer religion or metaphysics, but science, based on positive facts or direct sensations. The idea was that we could only understand the universe through relying on our sensations. Logic and mathematics gave another truth to society. The systematic way in which we reach a valid conclusion, based on premises. Truths can be deducted about the universe this way.

Logical positivists combined empirical observations on one hand, and logical, mathematical truths on the other and. Vienna Circle -

A set of scientists and other academics who convened to decide what science should be or is about. Lead to the production of their manifesto, ‘Knowledge’.

The manifesto primarily stated:

-

Logic and maths detect truths naked to the human eye. Truths of the world are based on observation via logical induction. Observable facts should not be kept private, but shared, and objective. Theories can be verified/proven. Religion and metaphysical elements have no place in science or theories. Goal was to create a unified science.

Consequences of Logical Positivism According to the Vienna circle and a result of logical positivism, we now have: -

-

Demarcation: The criteria of science. Science should be based upon objective facts only. Anything that does not is classed as a pseudoscience. (Contains metaphysical/subjective ideas.) Progress in science: Current scientific theories today now contain more observational statements and facts than theories did in the 17th century. The philosophy of science promotes the inductivist method.

Logical induction -

A way of verifying truths of the world through observation according to the Vienna circle. Consisted of multiple observational premises resulting in a conclusion about this truth. A1, A2, A3 are all B. A1, A2, A3 are all also C. Therefore, B has the property C.

Example: John, Mary and Peter are all swans. (Premise 1) John, Mary and Peter are all white. (Premise 2). All swans are therefore white. (Conclusion) Issues with logical induction -

The observations made through logical induction are not valid. They can easily be broken through one exception to the rule. The number of observations is irrelevant compared to the relevant counter examples. For example, one black swan being observed breaks the inductive reasoning that all swans are white. Therefore, observations are not theory neutral / objective.

Defences of Logical Induction -

Hume said that logical induction works psychologically, despite not working logically. A few observations do give a truth about the local environment, however this still does not make it true.

-

Inductivism worked before, this defends it on the basis of a flawed method. Just because something worked 5-6 times does not indicate it will work a 7th or 8th time. Truth is a statistical phenomenon. The more observations, the truer something must be. However, this is still flawed. You may do 100 correct observations one day, but the next day a single observation may prove your theory wrong.

Concepts that remain with us today -

Facts, as a result of direct observations. Predictions, drawing inferences from theories in order to predict these facts. Theories, a set of statements that organise observations so we can explain and predict. Laws, such as empirical generalisations. Models, stable and solid visualisations of a theory....