if u cn rd ths u r jst lke vryne lse

27
If u cn rd ths u r jst lke If u cn rd ths u r jst lke vryne lse. vryne lse. Aoccdring to a rscheerarhat an Elingsh Aoccdring to a rscheerarhat an Elingsh uinervtisy, it deosn’t mttaer in waht uinervtisy, it deosn’t mttaer in waht oderr the ltteers in a wrod are, the oderr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihing is taht frist and olny iprmoetnt tihing is taht frist and lsat ltteer are at the rghit pclae. lsat ltteer are at the rghit pclae. Youcan sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Youcan sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae we donot raed ervey Tihs is bcuseae we donot raed ervey lteter by itslef but the wrod as a lteter by itslef but the wrod as a wlohe. wlohe. Cehiro! Cehiro!

Upload: prince

Post on 14-Jan-2016

25 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

If u cn rd ths u r jst lke vryne lse. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: If u cn rd ths u r jst lke vryne lse

If u cn rd ths u r jst lke vryne lse.If u cn rd ths u r jst lke vryne lse.

Aoccdring to a rscheerarhat an Elingsh uinervtisy, it Aoccdring to a rscheerarhat an Elingsh uinervtisy, it deosn’t mttaer in waht oderr the ltteers in a wrod are, deosn’t mttaer in waht oderr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihing is taht frist and lsat ltteer are the olny iprmoetnt tihing is taht frist and lsat ltteer are at the rghit pclae. Youcan sitll raed it wouthit at the rghit pclae. Youcan sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae we donot raed ervey lteter porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae we donot raed ervey lteter by itslef but the wrod as a wlohe. by itslef but the wrod as a wlohe.

Cehiro!Cehiro!

Page 2: If u cn rd ths u r jst lke vryne lse

Observation: “ordinary” and scientificObservation: “ordinary” and scientific

I.I. Its role in accounts of scientific Its role in accounts of scientific reasoningreasoning

II.II. Hanson’s arguments that observations Hanson’s arguments that observations are “theory-laden”are “theory-laden”

III.III. The implications of Hanson’s The implications of Hanson’s arguments for accounts of scientific arguments for accounts of scientific reasoning and of scientific objectivityreasoning and of scientific objectivity

Page 3: If u cn rd ths u r jst lke vryne lse

ObservationObservationIn philosophy, it was long accepted that:In philosophy, it was long accepted that:

Facts are Facts are directly givendirectly given through observation through observation to unprejudiced observers with normal to unprejudiced observers with normal sensory receptors.sensory receptors.

Observations are (Observations are (logicallylogically) ) priorprior toto and and independent ofindependent of theory. theory.

Observations constitute Observations constitute a firm and reliable a firm and reliable foundationfoundation for science. for science.

Assumed by both those who claimed Assumed by both those who claimed scientists use “The Inductive Method” as scientists use “The Inductive Method” as well as by those who offered alternative well as by those who offered alternative accounts of scientific reasoning/logic.accounts of scientific reasoning/logic.

Page 4: If u cn rd ths u r jst lke vryne lse

Just how “obvious” are the observations Just how “obvious” are the observations scientists and the rest of us engage in? scientists and the rest of us engage in?

Models of scientific reasoningModels of scientific reasoning For those advocating “The Inductive Method,” For those advocating “The Inductive Method,”

observation came first and generalizations and observation came first and generalizations and hypotheses only later. hypotheses only later.

For those advocating “Sophisticated” Inductivism or For those advocating “Sophisticated” Inductivism or Falsificationism, observations were the foundation Falsificationism, observations were the foundation by which theories can be confirmed or falsified. by which theories can be confirmed or falsified.

In our reading by Duhem, he does not discuss In our reading by Duhem, he does not discuss observation in detail when arguing for Holism but he observation in detail when arguing for Holism but he does in a quote in Hanson’s article.does in a quote in Hanson’s article.

Page 5: If u cn rd ths u r jst lke vryne lse

Just how “obvious” are the observations scientists and the rest of us engage in?

““Enter a laboratory, approach the table crowded Enter a laboratory, approach the table crowded with an assortment of apparatus…with an assortment of apparatus…

““The experimenter is inserting into small openings The experimenter is inserting into small openings the metal ends of ebony-headed pins; the iron the metal ends of ebony-headed pins; the iron oscillates, and the mirror attached to it throws a oscillates, and the mirror attached to it throws a luminous band on a celluloid scale; the forward luminous band on a celluloid scale; the forward –backward motion of this spot enables the –backward motion of this spot enables the physicist to observe the minute oscillations of physicist to observe the minute oscillations of the iron bar.the iron bar.

““But ask him what is he doing. But ask him what is he doing.

Page 6: If u cn rd ths u r jst lke vryne lse

Just how “obvious” are the observations Just how “obvious” are the observations scientists and the rest of us engage in?scientists and the rest of us engage in?

““Will he answer “I am studying the oscillations of Will he answer “I am studying the oscillations of an iron bar that carries a mirror”?an iron bar that carries a mirror”?

““No, he will say that he is measuring the electric No, he will say that he is measuring the electric resistance of the spools. If you are astonished, if resistance of the spools. If you are astonished, if you ask him what his words mean, what relation you ask him what his words mean, what relation they have with the phenomena [you both have they have with the phenomena [you both have just observed]just observed]

He will answer that your question requires a long He will answer that your question requires a long explanation and that you should take a course in explanation and that you should take a course in electricity.” electricity.”

Page 7: If u cn rd ths u r jst lke vryne lse

ObservationObservationWhat is the nature of observation?What is the nature of observation?

Is it “raw”? (“the unvarnished news?)Is it “raw”? (“the unvarnished news?)Will 2 observers with normal sensory Will 2 observers with normal sensory receptors receptors alwaysalways “see the same thing” “see the same thing” when looking at “the same thing”?when looking at “the same thing”?Are observations, whether in science or Are observations, whether in science or common sense, prior to or independent common sense, prior to or independent of theory?of theory?Do observations provide a firm and Do observations provide a firm and reliable foundation for science?reliable foundation for science?

Page 8: If u cn rd ths u r jst lke vryne lse

Hanson on observationHanson on observationThe general argumentThe general argument There are two senses of ‘seeing’There are two senses of ‘seeing’

The The physical processesphysical processes involved that result in 2 involved that result in 2 tiny inverted images on each retina (which we tiny inverted images on each retina (which we do not see)do not see)

The The visualvisual experienceexperience of seeing – what we of seeing – what we seesee.. Observation, which is seeing Observation, which is seeing in the second in the second

sense of visual experiencesense of visual experience, is , is notnot solely solely determined by the physical processes determined by the physical processes involved involved in the first sense in the first sense of seeing. of seeing.

Page 9: If u cn rd ths u r jst lke vryne lse

ObservationObservationThe The physical processphysical process of “seeing” of “seeing” Light traveling from an object etches 4 inverted Light traveling from an object etches 4 inverted

images on our retinas images on our retinas That “information” is sent, via the optic nerves, That “information” is sent, via the optic nerves,

to our brains. to our brains. So, if two of us are looking at the same object, So, if two of us are looking at the same object,

from the same perspective, and similar lighting, from the same perspective, and similar lighting, etc… the images on our retinas are the same as etc… the images on our retinas are the same as is the information sent via the optic nerves.is the information sent via the optic nerves.

Yet we Yet we may not be seeing the same thingmay not be seeing the same thing in the in the sense of sense of our visual experiencesour visual experiences..

Page 10: If u cn rd ths u r jst lke vryne lse

HansonHansonImportant to keep in mind:Important to keep in mind: The “interlocutor”: her purpose and her The “interlocutor”: her purpose and her

“formula”“formula” That Hanson never denies that there is a That Hanson never denies that there is a

world full of objects that exist independently world full of objects that exist independently of us and constrain what it is possible to of us and constrain what it is possible to observe.observe.

Hanson offers Hanson offers layerslayers of arguments and of arguments and evidence to support his general argument evidence to support his general argument that “there’s more to seeing than meets the that “there’s more to seeing than meets the eyeball.”eyeball.”

Page 11: If u cn rd ths u r jst lke vryne lse

ObservationObservationThe “interlocutor”: its purpose and its formulaThe “interlocutor”: its purpose and its formula The purpose of the “voice” is to respond to The purpose of the “voice” is to respond to

what Hanson sees as the most obvious and what Hanson sees as the most obvious and significant challenge to his argumentsignificant challenge to his argument

Namely, that observers in all of his examples Namely, that observers in all of his examples (and generally) (and generally) do seedo see the same thing, but the same thing, but interpret it differentlyinterpret it differently. .

This is an attempt to save the philosophical This is an attempt to save the philosophical assumptions earlier outlined.assumptions earlier outlined.

Page 12: If u cn rd ths u r jst lke vryne lse

ObservationObservationHanson’s response: Hanson’s response: When observation is involved, we don’t first see and When observation is involved, we don’t first see and

then interpret – we just see …”then interpret – we just see …” The The actact of interpreting does involve two steps of interpreting does involve two steps Normal seeing does not…Normal seeing does not…If there wasn’t a world independent of us that constrains If there wasn’t a world independent of us that constrains

what it is possible to observe, what I am arguing what it is possible to observe, what I am arguing about the nature of observation would not be about the nature of observation would not be startling or surprising or a big deal. It’s because startling or surprising or a big deal. It’s because there is such a world that my argument is significant there is such a world that my argument is significant because that world has been used to advance an because that world has been used to advance an overly naïve view of observations.overly naïve view of observations.

Page 13: If u cn rd ths u r jst lke vryne lse
Page 14: If u cn rd ths u r jst lke vryne lse
Page 15: If u cn rd ths u r jst lke vryne lse
Page 16: If u cn rd ths u r jst lke vryne lse
Page 17: If u cn rd ths u r jst lke vryne lse

Hanson on observationHanson on observationGestalt experiences/experiments and Hanson’s Gestalt experiences/experiments and Hanson’s

general argument thatgeneral argument that There are two senses of ‘seeing’There are two senses of ‘seeing’ The The physical processesphysical processes involved that result involved that result

in 2 tiny inverted images on each retina in 2 tiny inverted images on each retina (which we do not see)(which we do not see)

The The visualvisual experienceexperience of seeing – what we of seeing – what we seesee..

That the second is not solely determined by That the second is not solely determined by the first.the first.

Page 18: If u cn rd ths u r jst lke vryne lse

Hanson on observationHanson on observationGestalt experiences/experiments and Hanson’s Gestalt experiences/experiments and Hanson’s

general argument:general argument: In each case, the “object” being observed In each case, the “object” being observed does does

not changenot change so the physical processes involved are so the physical processes involved are the same (light rays, retinal images, etc.)the same (light rays, retinal images, etc.)

But what we “see” in the sense of But what we “see” in the sense of visual visual experienceexperience does changedoes change..

We can learn to “flip” our image of the Necker We can learn to “flip” our image of the Necker cube… we can learn to see the card deck includes cube… we can learn to see the card deck includes anomalous cards.anomalous cards.

Prior experience, expectations, and learning to Prior experience, expectations, and learning to seesee

Page 19: If u cn rd ths u r jst lke vryne lse

ObservationObservation

Concepts, background knowledge, and Concepts, background knowledge, and general theories also help to shape what general theories also help to shape what we see (observe).we see (observe).

Perhaps obvious (or at least should be) Perhaps obvious (or at least should be) when we’re discussing scientific when we’re discussing scientific observations:observations:

Page 20: If u cn rd ths u r jst lke vryne lse

Observations in scienceObservations in scienceExamples of the role of concepts and theories:Examples of the role of concepts and theories:Debris tracks as evidence of subatomic particlesDebris tracks as evidence of subatomic particlesGalileo and Jupiter’s moons, and the moon’s Galileo and Jupiter’s moons, and the moon’s

mountains and cratersmountains and cratersArchaeologists and anthropologists on beads, caves, Archaeologists and anthropologists on beads, caves,

burial sites, tools, etc.burial sites, tools, etc.Psychologists on children’s development of a theory of Psychologists on children’s development of a theory of

mind (and relative lack thereof among other mind (and relative lack thereof among other primates)primates)

Perfection vs. evidence of history and of jury-riggingPerfection vs. evidence of history and of jury-riggingLearning to see using scientific instrumentsLearning to see using scientific instrumentsObserving sexual behaviors of speciesObserving sexual behaviors of species

Page 21: If u cn rd ths u r jst lke vryne lse

ObservationObservation

Another layer: Another layer: conceptual schemes (or conceptual schemes (or frameworks) frameworks) help shape what we seehelp shape what we see

Cross cultural differencesCross cultural differences Color schemesColor schemes

Red, white and blackRed, white and black Mathematical systemsMathematical systems

1, 2, 3, many1, 2, 3, many Two dimensional representations of Two dimensional representations of

three dimensional objectsthree dimensional objects

Page 22: If u cn rd ths u r jst lke vryne lse

Conceptual schemes and languageConceptual schemes and language

What do What do youyou see? see?What does an infant see?What does an infant see?What does a three year old see?What does a three year old see?What does an adult who has never What does an adult who has never

been introduced to apples see?been introduced to apples see?

Page 23: If u cn rd ths u r jst lke vryne lse

Conceptual schemes, language, Conceptual schemes, language, and what we observeand what we observe

Page 24: If u cn rd ths u r jst lke vryne lse

Conceptual schemes, language, Conceptual schemes, language, and what we observeand what we observe

Why doesn’t the 3 year old (or we) see:Why doesn’t the 3 year old (or we) see: A puddle of “apple stuff”A puddle of “apple stuff” An “apple-ing” eventAn “apple-ing” event A bunch of undetached apple partsA bunch of undetached apple parts An instantiation of the Platonic form “Applehood”An instantiation of the Platonic form “Applehood”

Because of the conceptual scheme our language Because of the conceptual scheme our language embodies and we learn as we learn the language: embodies and we learn as we learn the language: individual physical objects, for the most part, as well individual physical objects, for the most part, as well as notions of individuation -- “this is the same X I as notions of individuation -- “this is the same X I observed yesterday…”observed yesterday…”

Page 25: If u cn rd ths u r jst lke vryne lse

ObservationObservation

The “interlocutor’s formula”The “interlocutor’s formula” In each of Hanson’s examples (and mine), In each of Hanson’s examples (and mine),

two people two people do see the same thingdo see the same thing; they just ; they just interpret it differentlyinterpret it differently..

‘‘Interpretation’ has a perfectly precise Interpretation’ has a perfectly precise meaning. It sometimes involves figuring out meaning. It sometimes involves figuring out what we are looking it when it isn’t clear… or what we are looking it when it isn’t clear… or looking for the meaning of a text. It does not looking for the meaning of a text. It does not belong here, in the case of ordinary seeing belong here, in the case of ordinary seeing which just happens.which just happens.

Page 26: If u cn rd ths u r jst lke vryne lse

ObservationObservation

The formula: In each of Hanson’s examples, The formula: In each of Hanson’s examples, two people two people do see the same thingdo see the same thing; they just ; they just interpret it differentlyinterpret it differently..

It happens instantaneously, so we’re unaware It happens instantaneously, so we’re unaware we are doing it…we are doing it…

Hanson: instantaneous interpretation, like Hanson: instantaneous interpretation, like some other ideas in the history of philosophy, some other ideas in the history of philosophy, is just spooky (without warrant, stranger than is just spooky (without warrant, stranger than fiction… and so forth).fiction… and so forth).

Page 27: If u cn rd ths u r jst lke vryne lse

ObservationObservation

What are the implications of Hanson’s arguments What are the implications of Hanson’s arguments forforModels of scientific reasoning we have Models of scientific reasoning we have considered?considered?The notion of scientific objectivity?The notion of scientific objectivity?The veracity of our own observations?The veracity of our own observations?