TOWARDS A NEW EPISTEMOLOGY

Speculations I

Monography, 2022

17 The word 'law' in the seventeenth century is synonymous with 'form', 'principle', and 'axiom'; it does not mean an empirical regularity contrary to what we hear today in the wake of the empiricism of the Humean tradition (lawlike regularities). And the determination exercised on a natural or social phenomenon by its form-or law, or structureis not conceived as a causal determination: it determines the phenomenon in the sense that it circumscribes its possible becomings. 18 Bacon advances a series of experimental rules: variation of experience, prolongation of experience, translation of experience, reversal of experience, etc. (F. Bacon, De Dignitate, liv. V, ch.II, 1623 19 Experience is therefore in no way reduced to causal investigation. 20 I describe the inductive nature of analysis in ch.4

Springer eBooks, 2014

academia.edu, 2022

The 40-page paper deals with an effort to set a “meta” framework in Mathematics, Logic and Linguistics to derive all statements about Nature, Society and Reality. Aspects of scaling, and the use of space-time (what is referred to as the “triptych” are put forward as the top fundamental notions in establishing a hierarchical framework that involves in total sixteen concepts, including those of {existence, change, meaning, image, object, observer, observation, Ecology, information, emission, reception, medium, instrument} in addition to the triptych, as the foundational structure of such a framework. Meta-functions are derived on how to model the form and functions of fuzzy, fluid scaled elements in space-time. The concept of an image is elaborate on how it shapes observers’ perceptions of Nature, Society and Reality from the scale of fundamental particles in Quantum Mechanics, to the Cosmological scale of superclusters of galaxies.

Part I of this paper develops an account of science as a hierarchically structured dynamical system. The system is dynamic in that every element is subject to reconsideration in the face of new ideas and new data. The entire system is anchored to nature because data derive from interactions between nature and researchers, and data must be accounted for, although the data-reports that enter into the actual evaluation of scientific claims are subject to reinterpretation as other elements of the structure vary. Part II initiates the development of a new epistemology that accommodates the dynamic nature of science. Epistemology has traditionally been viewed as an a priori subject that provides norms for scientific research. Proponents of this view generally hold that only those propositions that are both true and infallible count as knowledge-a view that leads to doubts about the epistemic significance of the sciences. In analytic epistemology this account of knowledge is presented as an analysis of the knowledge concept found in a common conceptual system. I argue that this analysis may well be correct but that we are no more required to maintain folk epistemology than we are required to maintain folk physics. Since the sciences provide the best examples we have of epistemic achievement, I propose to build a new epistemology by reflection on the sciences and their history. One consequence of this approach is that epistemology is seen to be as dynamic as the sciences.

Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 2013

Man is a complex being that has defied all efforts to comprehend. This complexity is basically due to the nature of man. Several scholars and philosophers right from the ancient epoch to the contemporary period have employed several methods toward the understanding of man, but without any satisfying result. This effort to understand the nature of man has generated several problems that transcend philosophy into the sciences. Also, the scientific approach to grasp the nature of man has not yielded concrete evidence of satisfaction. This again, is due to the nature of science, which empirical orientation and root cannot capture the whole essence or nature of man which transcends the physical. This therefore, has created epistemological vacuum that has made it difficult for man to understand himself or reality that he constitutes. This scenario has created confusion in the search towards the understanding of man thereby revealing the dynamic nature of reality which includes man. This paper, therefore, seeks to explain human nature and the nature of science and posits that man or reality cannot be understood using a singular method of science but rather a combination of what the paper describes as a philo-scientific approach.

THE ROUTLEDGE COMPANION TO PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE, 2008

A WORTHWHILE REVIEW 648 PAGES TO BE ENJOYED ON A QUIET NIGHT OR TWO The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Science is an outstanding guide to the major themes, movements, debates and topics in philosophy of science. Fifty-five entries by a team of renowned international contributors are organized into four parts: • Historical and Philosophical Context • Debates • Concepts • Individual Sciences The Companion begins with a critical examination of how philosophy of science has been involved in a mutually fruitful interaction with philosophical theories in areas such as metaphysics, epistemology, and the philosophy of language, and reassesses the major schools of philosophy of science in the twentieth century. The second part explores the development of current debates among philosophers and scientists on issues such as confirmation, explanation, realism, scientific method, and the ethics of science. Part three discusses controversial concepts such as causation, prediction, unification, observation, and probability that lie at the heart of many disputes about science and scientific theories. The final part addresses some of the main philosophical problems that arise within eight branches of science: biology, chemistry, cognitive science, economics, mathematics, physics, psychology, and the social sciences. The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Science is essential reading for anyone interested in philosophy of science and the connections between philosophy and the natural and social sciences. Stathis Psillos is an Associate Professor of Philosophy of Science at the University of Athens, Greece. He is the author of Scientific Realism: How Science Tracks Truth (Routledge), Causation and Explanation and Philosophy of Science A–Z. Martin Curd is an Associate Professor of Philosophy at Purdue University, USA. He is co-editor (with Jan Cover) of Philosophy of Science: The Central Issues. PART I Historical and philosophical context 1 1 The epistemology of science after Quine 3 PAUL A. ROTH 2 The history of philosophy and the philosophy of science 15 JOANNE WAUGH AND ROGER ARIEW 3 Metaphysics 26 Stephen Mumford 4 Philosophy of language 36 Rod Bertolet 5 The role of logic in philosophy of science 47 Diderik Batens 6 Critical rationalism 58 Gürol Irzik 7 The historical turn in the philosophy of science 67 ALEXANDER BIRD 8 Logical empiricism 78 Thomas Uebel 9 Pragmatism and science 91 Robert Almeder Part II Debates 101 10 Bayesianism 103 Colin Howson 11 Confirmation 115 ALAN HÁJEK AND JAMES M. JOYCE 12 Empiricism 129 Elliott Sober vi 13 Essentialism and natural kinds 139 BRIAN ELLIS 14 Ethics of science 149 David B. Resnik 15 Experiment 159 Theodore Arabatzis 16 Explanation 171 JAMES Woodward 17 The feminist approach to the philosophy of science 182 CASSANDRA L. PINNICK 18 Inference to the best explanation 193 Peter Lipton 19 Laws of nature 203 Marc Lange 20 Naturalism 213 RONALD N. GIERE 21 Realism/anti-realism 224 Michael Devitt 22 Relativism about science 236 Maria Baghramian 23 Scientific method 248 Howard Sankey 24 Social studies of science 259 ROBERT NOLA 25 The structure of theories 269 Steven French 26 Theory-change in science 281 John Worrall 27 Underdetermination 292 Igor Douven 28 Values in science 302 GERALD DOPPELT vii Part III Concepts 315 29 Causation 317 Christopher Hitchcock 30 Determinism 327 Barry Loewer 31 Evidence 337 Peter Achinstein 32 Function 349 D. M. WALSH 33 Idealization 358 James Ladyman 34 Measurement 367 HASOK CHANG AND NANCY CARTWRIGHT 35 Mechanisms 376 Stuart Glennan 36 Models 385 DEMETRIS PORTIDES 37 Observation 396 ANDRé KUKLA 38 Prediction 405 MALCOLM FORSTER 39 Probability 414 Maria Carla Galavotti 40 Reduction 425 Sahotra Sarkar 41 Representation in science 435 PAUL TELLER 42 Scientific discovery 442 Thomas Nickles 43 Space and time 452 OLIVER POOLEY 44 Symmetry 468 Margaret Morrison viii 45 Truthlikeness 478 Graham Oddie 46 Unification 489 TODD JONES 47 The virtues of a good theory 498 Ernan McMullin Part IV Individual sciences 509 48 Biology 511 Alexander Rosenberg 49 Chemistry 520 Robin FINDLAY Hendry 50 Cognitive science 531 Paul Thagard 51 Economics 543 USKALI MÄKI 52 Mathematics 555 PETER CLARK 53 Physics 567 SIMON SAUNDERS 54 Psychology 581 RICHARD SAMUELS 55 Social sciences 594 HAROLD KINCAID Index 605 THEN AS A COMPLEMENTARY READING https://www.academia.edu/2807083/In_defence_of_scientism

theoryandscience.icaap.org

The most simple lesson science teaches is that there is always more to learn. Dissimilar as scientific disciplines may appear, nevertheless, all scientists are embarked on one journey: to understand the universe more "truthfully" -or, at least, more knowledgeably. The progress that scientists make toward that goal is evident everywhere. We are surrounded by a world of explosive innovation. We expect the world to change from day to day, and change it surely does. Just try to buy the latest version of a computer and you will see what I mean. Scientists are largely responsible for the huge quantity and rapid pace of social change. Oddly, however, in spite of all the evidence of scientific progress, one could argue that scientists know hardly any more about "where we're going" than they did centuries ago.

The Scientific Revolution marks a stark shift in society's understanding of nature and how it works. However, this shift has done more than simply change the face of how we go about studying nature and natural objects; it changed the course of human evolution in a way that is irreversible and destructive. To begin, we must understand what came before Galileo, Boyle, and Newton's influence, when Aristotle's notion of a purposive nature directed human understanding. And from there, we will move into the Scientific Revolution and the resulting mechanistic philosophy of nature that was its product.