science 2: is a broader conception of science still science? stuart a. umpleby the george washington...
Post on 30-Mar-2015
234 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Science 2: Is a Broader Conception of Science still Science?
Stuart A. UmplebyThe George Washington University
Washington, DC
Three conceptions of science 2
1. Ben Shneiderman’s notion of Science 2.0 – sharing open source data via the internet
2. Gibbons, et al. on mode 2 research – discipline-oriented research vs. product oriented research or process improvement research
3. Von Foerster’s second order cybernetics and Soros’s reflexivity theory are leading to a reconsideration of our conception of science
Are these changes really new?
1. The internet, open source data, and academic globalization are leading to a great expansion in collaboration
2. Multi-disciplinary product development teams are required by advanced technology
3. The sociology of knowledge is not yet considered to be the foundation for the social sciences. Radical constructivism is not widely known in the U.S.
World
1
2
3
ObserverDescription
A diagram of science 1 and science 2
• World, observer, and description correspond to Popper’s worlds 1, 2, and 3
• The triangle also describes three phases in the development of cybernetics – engineering cybernetics, biological cybernetics, and social cybernetics
• The left side – world and description – is science 1
• The whole triangle is science 2
Engineering cybernetics
• The classical scientific method• Create and test descriptions of the external
world• A photograph metaphor – theories should be
accurate descriptions
Elements of the classical philosophy of science
• Experiments are used to test theories• Theories give meaning to observations• Quantitative predictions are preferred to
merely qualitative predictions• Observations should be independent of the
characteristics of the observer• Results should be reproducible by other
experimenters
What is wrong with this view of science?
• Maturana pointed out that every statement made is made by an observer
• Science is a social activity. Thomas Kuhn’s view of how scientists work. Examples of physics and economics
• Social systems are composed of thinking participants.
Biological cybernetics
• Another name for “second order cybernetics”• The intention is to explain how the brain
creates descriptions of the world
World
1
2
3
ObserverDescription
How the nervous system works
• Image on your retina• The blind spot• Move your eyes relative to your head• Playing football: did the stadium move?• Listening to a speech• Conversations at a party• Two kittens• Injured war veterans
Images on the retina are inverted
The blind spot experiment
Two Kittens
Injured war veteran
Realism vs. constructivism
• Realists assume that the world is primary and ideas are secondary. Ideas are imperfect representations of the real world. This is an old philosophical debate.
• Constructivists point out that anything we know about the world we know through our senses. We have immediate access to ideas, but not to the world. Neurophysiology supported the constructivists
Lessons learned from neurophysiology
• The brain does a lot of work for us that we are not aware of
• Although we think we accurately perceive the external world, the “reality” we perceive is our own invention, based on our experiences and our interpretations of them
• Remember that animals perceive quite different worlds
World
1
2
3
ObserverDescription
Social cybernetics
• The sociology of knowledge – our views of society are influenced by our position in society
• Theories of society, when they are accepted and acted upon, change society
• Reflexivity – human beings both observe and participate in social systems.
• The metaphor of driving a car
Two conceptions of how to structure knowledge
• Most philosophers of science
• Cause and effect• If, then• Analysis• Reductionism• Theory
• E.A. Singer, Jr., Churchman, Ackoff
• Producer - product• Necessary conditions• Synthesis• Expansionism• Method
Science one vs. science two
• Observation• Description• Test knowledge• Extrapolate/ forecast• Reproduce experiments • Accuracy/ precision
• Participation• Prescription• Solve problems• Create/ design• Achieve agreement or
acceptance• Usefulness
The case of economics
• A thermodynamic model of the economy• People in an economy are assumed to be
rational profit maximizers with complete information which is available to all
• A series of Nobel Prizes have been awarded to people who have successfully challenged one of these assumptions
• Economics is now defined by its method
How to deal with the philosophy of science
• Avoid it, work around it, ignore it• Enlarge it• Heinz von Foerster suggested including the
observer in the domain of observations• If we add a new dimension, all the results in
science 1 also support science 2
New philosophy of science
An Application of the Correspondence Principle
Old philosophy of science
Amount of attention paid to the observer
Theories Methods
NoYes
Should methods be for the use ofindividuals or groups?
Is there a difference between thenatural sciences and the socialsciences?
Should knowledge in the field of management beconstructed in the form of theories or methods?
Should we reject thephilosophy of science?
GroupsIndividuals
“Act like this”
Expand the philosophy ofscience to include knowingsubjects
“Think like this”
Popper’s doctrine ofthe unity of method
What should take its place?How should knowledge beconstructed?
Yes No
Do human activities change systems?
• Human beings change social systems by changing laws and theories
• As technology improves, human beings are even changing the natural environment – soil, fish, climate
• We are learning to think about ourselves as participants in the systems we study
• But to do that we need to change our conception of science
Ideas
Variables Groups
Events
A reflexive theory operates at two levels
Self-reference leads to inconsistency
• Lou Kauffman has shown that inconsistency is not the problem. Rather there is a need to pay attention to process and multiple possibilities
• Once participants are admitted as part of the process being modeled and their decision making and design abilities are taken into account, then the multiple possibilities to which they give rise must be taken into account and not seen as contradictory
• Contradiction arises in the demand for simultaneous but opposing possibilities. When simultaneity is opened up into process, then contradictions open up into multiple possibilities
Objections to paying attention to the observer
• Including the observer requires self-reference, a form of inconsistency. Lou Kauffman has shown how to reinterpret this difficulty
• Science would lose the claim of objectivity, the claim to objective authority
• The new activity should be called art or philosophy, not science
Our ideas as constraints
• Science 1 was our invention. It is constraining us
• We can choose to live within the constraints, or we can choose to reinterpret the constraints and design a new conception of science
Is a broader conception of science still science?
• We need to surrender our claims of objectivity and our feelings of deductive certainty
• But we can define multidisciplinary methods• We will still have peer review to identify high
quality work
Contact Information
Prof. Stuart Umpleby Department of Management School of Business George Washington University Washington, DC 20052 USA
www.gwu.edu/~umpleby umpleby@gwu.edu
Presented at the World Multi-conference on Cybernetics, Systemics, and Informatics
Orlando, Florida June 29 – July 3, 2010
Three Versions of Cybernetics
By transforming conceptual systems (through persuasion, not coercion), we can change society
If people accept constructivism, they will be more tolerant
Scientific knowledge can be used to modify natural processes to benefit people
An important consequence
Ideas are accepted if they serve the observer’s purposes as a social participant
Ideas about knowledge should be rooted in neurophysiology.
Natural processes can be explained by scientific theories
A key assumption
How people create, maintain, and change social systems through language and ideas
How an individual constructs a “reality”
How the world worksWhat must be explained
Explain the relationship between the natural and the social sciences
Include the observer within the domain of science
Construct theories which explain observed phenomena
The puzzle to be solved
The biology of cognition vs. the observer as a social participant
Realism vs. ConstructivismReality vs. scientific theories
A key distinction
A pragmatic view of epistemology: knowledge is constructed to achieve human purposes
A biological view of epistemology: how the brain functions
A realist view of epistemology: knowledge is a “picture” of reality
The view of epistemology
Social CyberneticsBiological CyberneticsEngineering Cybernetics
top related