RE: [Fis] Scientific Method

Dear Michael,

The philosophy of science on which you build your argument is on grounds
much shakier than the sciences on which it reflects, and it has moved beyond
the point of the Popper-Kuhn debate. For example, one calls this within the
philosophy of science "the linguistic turn" (e.g., Quine). It seems to me
that the sciences have been developed as specific communication systems
(discourses) which use, for example, arguments. My main interest is in how
these discursive structures develop and how epistemic considerations are
constructed and validated with them. Thus, the focus is on scientific
communication structures and how one can study these. Perhaps, one can call
this a communicative turn in the philosophy of science.

Because the sciences develop both in terms of the information exchanges
(e.g., experimental results), the meaning provided to these informations in
discourses, and the validation processes in these discourses generating
provisional knowledge, the system under study is complex. Information theory
enables us to study such complex systems both dynamically and in terms of
their complexity. (In social science statistics it is difficult to recombine
the multi-variate perspective with the longitudinal.) Therefore, my interest
in these discussions is mainly from a methodological perspective. However,
my main theoretical interest is in (empirical) science studies or more
generally in the study of knowledge-based systems.

It is a very clear result from the empirical study of the sciences that the
various sciences develop with different dynamics. You mention Kuhn who
already pointed to the different meaning of the concept of atomic weight in
chemistry and physics at his time. The differences with biology, for
example, are much larger--not to speak of economics or the social sciences.
For example, "nature" itself is considered in evolution theory as an
operation ("natural selection"), while in physics the natural data are
"given". In economics "selection" is often defined with reference to a
market system.

Herbert Simon has proposed to think more operationally about the sciences in
terms of heuristics ("truth finding") and problem-solving. This is not to
deny that the searching for truth assumes that some statements are more true
than others. I am not a relativist in that sense, but I think that we have
to think about the sciences in a more relaxed and reflexive mode: how do the
different sciences develop? how can we study these processes empirically?
can we measure the development of knowledge? is it possible to simulate
these developments? Such questions seem also socially very urgent given the
increased of the science-technologies in a knowledge-based economy, isn't
it?

What will be validated as scientific and what not, cannot be said ex ante.
When Volta did his experiments with electricity, he himself proudly
announced them as a new philosophy as by the way did Newton in his time. One
of the major challenges of today is to study systems in which the humans are
enroled. Psychology with a more objective approach to studying human
behaviour has much advanced in developing scientific rigour in its methods.
When we study the sciences, the communicative structures add importantly to
the behavioural layer.

With kind regards,

 
Loet
 
PS:

> I think we're all better off for that diversity. But, what
> worries me, is a possible diminution of the natural sciences,
> where sloth, or unreason, or just selfish interest, may find
> an excuse in ambiguous use of the term scientific method, or
> lack of a determined defense of the historical efficacy of
> those methods., for the publication of nonsense camouflaged
> with a scientific imprimatur.
In the meantime, there are about 1700 journals covered by the Social Science
Citation Index against appr. 5500 by the Science Citation Index.

  _____

Loet Leydesdorff
Amsterdam School of Communications Research (ASCoR)
Kloveniersburgwal 48, 1012 CX Amsterdam
Tel.: +31-20- 525 6598; fax: +31-20- 525 3681
 <mailto:loet@leydesdorff.net> loet@leydesdorff.net ;
<http://www.leydesdorff.net/> http://www.leydesdorff.net/

 <http://www.upublish.com/books/leydesdorff-sci.htm> The Challenge of
Scientometrics ; <http://www.upublish.com/books/leydesdorff.htm> The
Self-Organization of the Knowledge-Based Society
Received on Thu Jul 22 08:33:31 2004