THE NOTION OF SCIENTIFIC EXPLANATION AND TRUTH.

THE NOTION OF SCIENTIFIC EXPLANATION.

• The scientific enterprise’s only preoccupation is to venture into nature and explain it’s findings to man, in order to better his lot in life.• This knowledge is classified, it is not

common to all men, hence the need for explanation.

SCIENTIFIC EXPLANATION.

• Scientists and those related to them do their explanation in either of six(6) ways. By the end of this scrutiny we would know that which is the best.• Explanation with reasons: is when a

phenomenon’s occurrence is supported by so called sequential reasons.

SCIENTIFIC EXPLANATION.

• This type is common among social scientists.( examples are Marx’s and Freud’s idea of the concept of God.excess or scantiness of rain versus N.E.P.A., etc)• Functional or Teleological explanation: is

that which dwells or focuses on the functionality of a thing(tissue, concept, etc.)

SCIENTIFIC EXPLANATION.

• This explanation focuses on the usefulness of the thing concerned in the future. For instance literacy in I.T. could have been explained like this 30/40 years ago to a C.E.O., in encouraging him to buy electric typewriters and computers. Appendix is commonly operated out of the human body-why?

SCIENTIFIC EXPLANATION.

• Genetic explanation: is employed in analysing the traits in a particular specie, family, colony or community. This is usually based on assumptions and particular, isolated, handpicked events that are deemed relevant to the discussion at hand. This explanation is therefore based on generalizations and it’s conclusions are probabilistic.

TYPES OF EXPLANATIONS.

• Reduction model of explanation: is when an unusual situation is explained away and make the abnormal appear normal. E. g when a person refuses to ride in a vehicle and chooses to trek to Sango on foot. The reason? He has had an accident previously.

TYPES OF EXPLANATIONS.

• Deductive model of explanation: insists that scientific analysis must meet some conditions-

1. It must make reference to existing general laws,

2. There must be a stated empirical hypothesis about the natural order.

3. The hypothesis must be in consonance with previous findings.

SCIENTIFIC EXPLANATION.

4. Based on the above, inference or conclusions can be drawn. The problem with this type of explanation is that it explains the sequence of knowledge acquisition but gives no room for questions or argument. Neither does it give new/ added knowledge.

•EXPLANATION FORMS.

• Inductive explanation: is that which does not need make reference to existing laws about the issue under discussion, neither is there need for previously formulated hypothesis. This explanation allows new and novel discoveries to be aired. The only snag on this is that it’s findings are probabilistic, cannot be depended on.

FORMALIST & CONTEXTUALIST THEORIES OF EXPLANATION.

• The bone of contention here is how are scientific theories and their predictive powers presented so that non-scientists can benefit alike.• Formalist’s explanation: asks if there are

universal.• It further inquires if a logical form that

scientific findings can fit into.

FORMALIST, CONTEXTUALIST.

• The formalists subscribe to the need for a logical framework into which a scientific explanation must fit into. The contextualists prefer that a scientific explanation satisfy all linguistic and grammatical structures. This is so that all who access such a document can readily understand it when read-knowledge is to fill the blanks that are in the reader’s life.

DOES SCIENCE REALLY EXPLAIN?

• The concern of science is with nature. But scientific hypothesis, theories and laws are solely concerned with the ‘’how’’ of nature and not the ‘’why’’ of nature.• As much as science is in search of truth,

it has not been able to arrive at absolute truths, changing discoveries.

SCIENCE/ EXPLANATION.

• Scientific explanations cover the interrelationship between specie in terms of character traits, blood group, genotype, among others.

THE NOTION OF SCIENTIFIC TRUTH.

• Truth as held by science is knowledge that is verifiable and agreed on by all.• Truth is not a personal formulation

but a public and objectively accepted body of information.• Truth for the scientist is about

nature- the visible, not the invisible.

SCIENTIFIC TRUTH.

• Scientific knowledge though public may begin as a private experience.( e.g. Newton’s gravitational law started as an observation and puzzle.) This is then made known to others of like minds, who would subject same to logical and empirical tests.

• If confirmed it is accepted as TENTATIVE TRUTH.

• This increases scientific knowledge however

ASCERTAINIG SCIENTIFIC TRUTH.

• Scientists and thinkers have arrived at some ways by which knowledge acquired can be tagged truth. These are the they:• Correspondence Test: is common to

Bertrand Russell, G.E. Moore in contemporary days although Aristotle used it in time past to test truth.

CORRESPONDENCE TEST.

• This theory states that a theory, proposition or idea is truth if it corresponds to reality- an empirical state or situation. E.g. the claim that a ghost is manipulating your computer becomes a truth when there is a corresponding evidence.

COHERENCE TEST.

• Coherence Test: as held by Bradley, Spinoza, Leibnitz is more in use in the sphere of pure mathematics. It states that a statement, theory or proposition is truth if and only if it agrees with other statements or theories previously in existence or accepted in that area of knowledge.

PRAGMATIST TEST.

• This is a movement associated with America, started by C.S. Peirce. This test approves a theory, proposition or idea as truth if it has cash value, if it is beneficial to man, if it has positive consequence on man. These say no public fund be used for a research that will rest in peace on a shelf.

THE TRUTH TEST.

• Performative Test: advocated by P.F. Strawson states that a truth is that theory, proposition or statement that can be performed or acted out.• There has arisen a lot of controversy

about the ‘’real’’ test for scientific truth, where then is the actual truth that science claims to present to man?

DEFINING SCIENTIFIC TRUTH.

• In defining truth, some schools of thought have emerged attempting to proffer concise definition system.• Verificationism: is the standpoint of

the vienna circle, also called logical positivism.

DEFINING SCIENTIFIC TRUTH.

• The verifiability principle states that a proposition, postulate, law, hypothesis is meaningful and truth if it can be verified or experienced empirically.

DEFINING SCIENTIFIC TRUTH.

• Falsificationism and relative verisimilitude: states that there is no objective and true knowledge. No matter the corroborations, acquired knowledge is only near the truth, not the absolute truth. Truth is like a shadow that cannot be captured.

TRUTH, IT’S DEFINITION IN SCIENCE.

• Individualism and objectivism test: states that truth is discovered gradually and painstakingly. It will keep growing in content until it will be beyond doubt. Truth they say is beyond the individual, beyond subjective and private interpretation.

SCIENTIFIC TRUTH.

• Scientific Truth is that which is uncovered from nature through rigorous findings and tests. The goal of scientific enterprise is said to be concerned with acquisition of objective truth.