Phil 3318: Philosophy of Science Quine & the Social dimension of Science

Quine Central Thesis: –Empiricism is grounded on two dogmas, both of which are ill-founded. 1.Distinction between analytic and synthetic 2.Reduction of all predicates to experiential datums.

Analytic v. Synthetic Analytic: predicate adds no information than what is contained in the subject: –Bachelor is an available adult male –I exist –Hesperus is the star that rises in the morning

Analytic v Synthetic Synthetic statements add information to the subject: –Groundhogs climb trees –I am a professor of philosophy –Hesperus is phosphorus.

Extension General terms pick out classes of objects: –‘Cat’ -> all cats –‘Creatures with a heart’ -> creatures with a heart –‘Creatures with a kidney’ -> creatures with a kidney Now, it just happens to be the case that these two classes are the same, but there is nothing in the concept of one that would tell you that. –Same extension, different meaning.

Note: Terms that are co-extensive can be substituted for one another without changing the truth value: –No bachelor is married –No unmarried male is married. –(that’s why there is no information in these statements)

So why the problem w/ Analyticy? How do words get their definitions? –Lexically –Stipulatively –Ostensively? Except in the extreme case of stipulative definition, each of these depends on the notion of synonymy, and therefore cannot be the basis for analycity.

Can interchangibility suffice as a basis for analycity? ‘Bachelor’ has ten letters –‘Unmarried adult male’ has ten letters ‘Necessarily, all and only unmarried males are unmarried males’ –‘Necessarily, all and only bachelors are unmarried males’ ‘Necessarily, all and only creatures with hearts are creatures with hearts’ –‘Necessarily, all and only creatures with kidneys are creatures with hearts.’

Carnap: Not really important – a matter for the history of philosophy.

Verification & Reduction Verification: the meaning of a statement is the method by which that statement could be verified. –A statement is analytic when it is synonymous with a tautology. –But synonymy (likeness of meaning) then implies likeness of verification method. So how do we verify? –Reduce to sense-experience predicates

And how do we reduce? To each statement, there is a unique range of possible sense-experiences that will confirm (verify) or disconfirm that statement –But, for the case of statements that use terms that are not obviously sense- experience terms, we need to substitute (translate) theory-statements into experience-statements.

Quine’s suggestion “is that our statements about the external world face the tribunal of sense experience not individually but only as a corporate body” (295) –In short: every theory is complete, translation between theories is impossible, and entire theories, NOT individual hypotheses, are confirmed or disconfirmed by experience / experiment (the Quine-Duhem Thesis)

Lakatos Progressive v. degenerative research programs –Theory leads to discovery of hitherto unknown facts –Theories are fabricated to explain already known facts

Sociological Demarcation : The difference between science and nonscience is at most an institutional difference. Institutions Disciplinary Matrix (Kuhn): –Set of theories, techniques, standards, institutional practices, social orgnanizations, problem-solving exemplars.

Perhaps Science is Distinctively Social Paul Ziman: –“Science is public knowledge… The objective of science … is a consensus of rational opinion over the widest possible field.” –“Science stands in the region where the intellectual, the psychological and the sociological coordinate axes intersect. It is knowledge, therefore intellectual, conceptual and abstract. It is inevitably created by individual men and women and therefore has a strong psychological aspect. It is public and therefore molded and determined by the social relations between individuals.”

Kuhn Finally, at a still higher level, there is another set of commitments without which no man is a scientist. The scientist must, for example, be concerned to understand the world and to extend the precision and scope with which it has been ordered. That commitment must, in turn, lead him to scrutinize, either for himself or through colleagues, some aspect of nature in great empirical detail. And if that scrutiny displays pockets of disorder, then these must challenge him to a new refinement of his observational techniques or to a further articulation of his theories. (42)

Social Practice 1. Each suggests that science is social in these respects: –1. Peer Review –2. Quality of Publication –3. Professional Advancement –4. Professional Recognition Social Practices Drive Reform In –1. Store of Accepted Facts. –2. Store of Concepts –3. Norms of Inquiry: Experimental Techniques and Protocols. –4. Norms for Assessment Explanation and Theory –5. Norms of Rationality

Scientific Attitude: Haugland Scientists are scientists by virtue of their commitments, commitments that require… vigilance. “Pockets of apparent disorder” are nothing but apparent breaches of the relevant constitutive standards… the scientist must be resolved to be on the lookout for them, and resolved not to tolerate them.

Feyerabend Is the social organization of science something that distinguishes it from religion and other forms of dominance and control? –Feyerabend

Why Does it Matter?

A Different Question What Makes for Good Science? –Intersubjective Testability –Reliability –Precision –Coherence –Scope –Explanatory Power