Define Rationalism
Velasquez 5.1 and 5.5 All of your responses should be written in complete sentences.
1. Define Rationalism
The view that knowledge of the world can be obtained by relying on reason without the aid of the senses.
2. Define Empiricism
Knowledge about the world can be attained only through sense experience.
3. What is Induction and how does it work? How does it make use of both empiricism and rationalism?
It is defined as the reliance of observations, generalizations and repeated confirmation.
It works off of the scientific method model.
Our knowledge doesn't account for a conclusive answer, but through the use of our senses we can use our knowledge to guide to something deeper than our own understanding.
4. What is the Hypothetical Method …show more content…
and how does it work? How does it make use of both empiricism and rationalism?
Using reason to direct a hypothesis in a way that it is able to explain why for the factor at hand.
An example is Darwin's Theory of Evolution, he took the observation and tried to create the hypothesis based off various variables, rocks, fossils, and animals to question if man is indeed part of a process of nature.
Uses the scientifc model and targets the big picture, what is it that may be at hand. It is creative in encompassing many facts and not only generalizations.
5. How does the Hypothetical method differ from Induction?
This is not about generalizations, it progresses to particulars with more depth and reason to guide research.
6. According to Karl Popper, what role does falsification play in science?
It shows that in some events and cases that the statement can be false. The more times one tries to prove a theory false and concludes that the theory is not the repetition of doing this will strengthen the theory or find it false.
7. According to your text, what are the 5 criteria for distinguishing science from pseudoscience?
Should be accurate in its domain. Should be consistent with other theories as well as internally. Be broad in scope: Theory's consequences should extend far beyond the particular observation. Laws or sub-theories. It should be simple and bring order to the phenomena and set it as confused through the absence of
it. Be fruitful of new research findings and not unnote relationships among the already known.
8. Based on the characteristics of science outlined in the chapter, can science answer the question of whether God exists?
Science cannot answer the question of God's existence. God is not able to be predicted and tested through the scientific method. Scriptures state faith alone is sufficient, however scientific studies would not accept such an answer, because the proof would be absent. We can test scriptures however, through scriptures it very well could point to God, because once more, God in his fullness will not fit perfectly in our scientific models and due to this it would be wise to say that we would exchange that possibility for something more material based that non-material based.
For “Science in Action: How Science Works
1. Science is usually honored in the contemporary world as a privileged way of gaining knowledge. In light of what you read in the textbook: as you watch this short video, write down ways that you see induction, the hypothetical method and falsification, and scientific communities at work in the process of science.
Scientific communities at work can be found with the interactions of various publications, feedback and discussions.
Hyptotheticsl method, exploring works, asking questions and making observations.
Induction, comparing works and comparing through details, physical characteristics and looking into the past for further observations.
Falsification, when the data does not line up, moments where the individual has no further direction on their own, and when data is skewed.
For “Beyond Science?”One of the key questions in any philosophy of science is how to distinguish science from pseudoscience. This program offers examples of ideas and practices that many consider to be pseudoscience.
1. Revisit the textbook’s description of pseudoscience. Then, explain how dowsing could be considered pseudoscience. Also, what would it take to scientifically investigate dowsing?
Dowsing does not rely on the inductive method to establish any of their claims. It is not accurate, nor is it capable of being replicated successfully. Modern science has shown that our subconscious may be causing involuntary movement. What science can prove, is that dowsing has not found anything.
2. How does the program relate Occam’s razor (roughly: the simplest explanation is usually the best explanation) to the claim of an alien crash site at Rozwell New Mexico? How might Occam’s razor relate to the difference between science and pseudoscience? Pseudoscience, tends to have elaborate or some may say unusual and complex with little depth. We fear the unknown.
Black eyes were present to protect the aliens eyes.
In science, there is a more simplistic and evidence to why they claim it is the best explanation due to the findings.
Neoprene balloon material turned black over time.
Over 180 other UFO's, balloons and plantes have been shown as the linking factors.
There has been zero sightings.
Occam's Razor
Only aliens to exists, are in Hollywood.
3. What’s the difference between Scott and Hal (searching for zero point energy) and dowsers? What makes Scott and Hal more likely to be examples of science rather than pseudoscience?
The two are different, because the methods they are using and one has an understanding that they may be false. Scott and Hall has a case which may or may not be true, but it is not proven one or the other. The scientific community has a consensus that there may or may not be zero point energy.
Scott and Hal are cognitive to being deceived from self-conceptional delusion unlike dowsers who will consistently make an excuse for their lack of understanding and findings. “Always attack as an error, but wait for the consistency.”
4. What makes the evidence against graphology science and not pseudoscience?
Consistency is not there, and room for error is high due to variables from the person who is writing and the person who is analyzing the information.
It is reliant on characteristics that are inconsistent and the end result is very general which may not be repeated with the same result.
5. At the end of the video, what does the scientific method have to do with self-deception?
If we are not careful, we can and will fool ourselves.
The scientific method, will set up safe guards to protect us from ourselves.
1. Define Rationalism
The view that knowledge of the world can be obtained by relying on reason without the aid of the senses.
2. Define Empiricism
Knowledge about the world can be attained only through sense experience.
3. What is Induction and how does it work? How does it make use of both empiricism and rationalism?
It is defined as the reliance of observations, generalizations and repeated confirmation.
It works off of the scientific method model.
Our knowledge doesn't account for a conclusive answer, but through the use of our senses we can use our knowledge to guide to something deeper than our own understanding.
4. What is the Hypothetical Method …show more content…
and how does it work? How does it make use of both empiricism and rationalism?
Using reason to direct a hypothesis in a way that it is able to explain why for the factor at hand.
An example is Darwin's Theory of Evolution, he took the observation and tried to create the hypothesis based off various variables, rocks, fossils, and animals to question if man is indeed part of a process of nature.
Uses the scientifc model and targets the big picture, what is it that may be at hand. It is creative in encompassing many facts and not only generalizations.
5. How does the Hypothetical method differ from Induction?
This is not about generalizations, it progresses to particulars with more depth and reason to guide research.
6. According to Karl Popper, what role does falsification play in science?
It shows that in some events and cases that the statement can be false. The more times one tries to prove a theory false and concludes that the theory is not the repetition of doing this will strengthen the theory or find it false.
7. According to your text, what are the 5 criteria for distinguishing science from pseudoscience?
Should be accurate in its domain. Should be consistent with other theories as well as internally. Be broad in scope: Theory's consequences should extend far beyond the particular observation. Laws or sub-theories. It should be simple and bring order to the phenomena and set it as confused through the absence of
it. Be fruitful of new research findings and not unnote relationships among the already known.
8. Based on the characteristics of science outlined in the chapter, can science answer the question of whether God exists?
Science cannot answer the question of God's existence. God is not able to be predicted and tested through the scientific method. Scriptures state faith alone is sufficient, however scientific studies would not accept such an answer, because the proof would be absent. We can test scriptures however, through scriptures it very well could point to God, because once more, God in his fullness will not fit perfectly in our scientific models and due to this it would be wise to say that we would exchange that possibility for something more material based that non-material based.
For “Science in Action: How Science Works
1. Science is usually honored in the contemporary world as a privileged way of gaining knowledge. In light of what you read in the textbook: as you watch this short video, write down ways that you see induction, the hypothetical method and falsification, and scientific communities at work in the process of science.
Scientific communities at work can be found with the interactions of various publications, feedback and discussions.
Hyptotheticsl method, exploring works, asking questions and making observations.
Induction, comparing works and comparing through details, physical characteristics and looking into the past for further observations.
Falsification, when the data does not line up, moments where the individual has no further direction on their own, and when data is skewed.
For “Beyond Science?”One of the key questions in any philosophy of science is how to distinguish science from pseudoscience. This program offers examples of ideas and practices that many consider to be pseudoscience.
1. Revisit the textbook’s description of pseudoscience. Then, explain how dowsing could be considered pseudoscience. Also, what would it take to scientifically investigate dowsing?
Dowsing does not rely on the inductive method to establish any of their claims. It is not accurate, nor is it capable of being replicated successfully. Modern science has shown that our subconscious may be causing involuntary movement. What science can prove, is that dowsing has not found anything.
2. How does the program relate Occam’s razor (roughly: the simplest explanation is usually the best explanation) to the claim of an alien crash site at Rozwell New Mexico? How might Occam’s razor relate to the difference between science and pseudoscience? Pseudoscience, tends to have elaborate or some may say unusual and complex with little depth. We fear the unknown.
Black eyes were present to protect the aliens eyes.
In science, there is a more simplistic and evidence to why they claim it is the best explanation due to the findings.
Neoprene balloon material turned black over time.
Over 180 other UFO's, balloons and plantes have been shown as the linking factors.
There has been zero sightings.
Occam's Razor
Only aliens to exists, are in Hollywood.
3. What’s the difference between Scott and Hal (searching for zero point energy) and dowsers? What makes Scott and Hal more likely to be examples of science rather than pseudoscience?
The two are different, because the methods they are using and one has an understanding that they may be false. Scott and Hall has a case which may or may not be true, but it is not proven one or the other. The scientific community has a consensus that there may or may not be zero point energy.
Scott and Hal are cognitive to being deceived from self-conceptional delusion unlike dowsers who will consistently make an excuse for their lack of understanding and findings. “Always attack as an error, but wait for the consistency.”
4. What makes the evidence against graphology science and not pseudoscience?
Consistency is not there, and room for error is high due to variables from the person who is writing and the person who is analyzing the information.
It is reliant on characteristics that are inconsistent and the end result is very general which may not be repeated with the same result.
5. At the end of the video, what does the scientific method have to do with self-deception?
If we are not careful, we can and will fool ourselves.
The scientific method, will set up safe guards to protect us from ourselves.