Transcript The Scientific Method and its Practice in the Social Sciences: A

The Scientific Method and its Practice
in the Social Sciences:
A Science of Politics?
F-N & N (Chapter 1 – The Scientific Approach)
K,K & V (Chapter 1 – The Science in Social Science)
Gerring (Chapters 1-2)
Gordon, Scott. 1991. The History and Philosophy of Social Science. Routledge, Ch. 18, The foundations of
science, pp.589-668. Available online at:
http://www.compilerpress.atfreeweb.com/Anno%20Scott%20Ch.%2018%20Fdn%20of%20Science.htm (read
section B especially closely)
Stephen Thornton. 1997. “Karl Popper.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
http://www.ul.ie/~philos/vol1/popper.html
Alexander Bird. 2004. “Thomas Kuhn.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/thomas-kuhn/
What is science and the scientific
method?
What is science and the scientific
method?

Science is a way/method of obtaining
knowledge. It is defined by its method.
Therefore, it is useful to distinguish science
from other ways of obtaining knowledge.
3 Approaches to Obtaining Knowledge



Authoritarian Mode
Mystical Mode
Rational Mode

Science, as a methodology, was developed as a
way to overcome the flaws of these alternative
methods.
The Scientific Method – Shared Features/Goals
as Practiced Today F-NN + KKV
1. The goal is explanation / inference
The Scientific Method – Shared Features/Goals
as Practiced Today (F-NN) + KKV)
1. The goal is explanation / inference
2. Scientific explanation (and therefore method)
must ultimately rely on objective, systematic,
empirical observation
The Scientific Method – Shared Features/Goals
as Practiced Today (F-NN) + KKV)
1. The goal is explanation / inference
2. Scientific explanation (and therefore method)
must ultimately rely on objective, systematic,
empirical observation
3. Openness of method / practice – helps insure
objectivity


Intersubjectivity
Replication
The Scientific Method – Shared Features/Goals
as Practiced Today (F-NN) + KKV)
1. The goal is explanation / inference
2. Scientific explanation (and therefore method)
must ultimately rely on objective, systematic,
empirical observation
3. Openness of method / practice – helps insure
objectivity


Intersubjectivity
Replication
4. The conclusions are uncertain.
The Evolution of the Scientific Method

Vienna Circle (ca. 1929) – (Called
themselves positivists)
The Evolution of the Scientific Method

Vienna Circle (ca. 1929) – (Called
themselves positivists)

“ultra-empiricist”
Rejected causality

Founder: Moritz Schlick

The Evolution of the Scientific Method

Carl Hempel (logical empiricism) and the
‘covering law’ model of science
The Evolution of the Scientific Method

Carl Hempel (logical empiricism) and the
‘covering law’ model of science


the central task of human inquiry is to explain
phenomena
non-observable entities – and especially causal
connections - play an essential role in explanation
The Evolution of the Scientific Method

Deductive-Nomological Explanation (Carl Hempel)

Consists of





(1) a series of universal laws (L) (assumed to be true)
(2) a set of causal antecedents (A) – specific conditions – that as
a result of laws in (L) directly results in
(3) event/phenomenon to be explained (E=explanandum)
E always happens if L and C are correctly specified
(deterministic)
Important criticism –

the “problem of induction” – (universal laws?)
The Evolution of the Scientific Method

Hempel adds a second type of scientific
explanation

Deductive-Nomological Explanation


(see earlier slide)
Probabilistic Explanation


“Universal laws” do not operate with certainty (but
with some probability)
the occurrence of E is only expected with some
likelihood (it is not certain to occur)
The Evolution of the Scientific Method

Karl Popper
The Evolution of the Scientific Method

Karl Popper




Scientific knowledge acquired by means of successive
Conjectures and Refutations (the title of one of his books)
Theories are tentative ‘conjectures’ (as opposed to
universal laws that are by definition assumed to be true)
They cannot be verified by empirical evidence, but they
can be refuted.
We build up our knowledge of the world by ascertaining
what is not true (falsification)
The Evolution of the Scientific Method

Karl Popper



But can empirical evidence really falsify a theory
with certainty?
The ‘Duhem-Quine’ thesis
Popper modifies position - theory cannot be
rejected unless another theory is available that is
better
Additional Perspectives on the
Scientific Method

Milton Freidman – Predictive
Instrumentalism
Additional Perspectives on the
Scientific Method

Milton Freidman – Predictive
Instrumentalism



“The Methodology of Positive Economics” (1953
essay)
Science as a “mysterious black box” of
propositions
Successful prediction is the only criterion by
which scientific theories should be judged
Prescriptive vs. Descriptive
Perspectives on Scientific Progress

Thomas Kuhn – The Structure of Scientific
Revolutions (1962)

“During the past twenty years or so no theory of
the nature of science has received more attention
than Kuhn’s, by natural and social scientists as
well as by professional historians and
philosophers of science.” (Gordon)
Prescriptive vs. Descriptive
Perspectives on Scientific Progress

Thomas Kuhn – The Structure of Scientific
Revolutions (1962)

Normal science vs. revolutionary science
Prescriptive vs. Descriptive
Perspectives on Scientific Progress

Thomas Kuhn – The Structure of Scientific
Revolutions (1962)

Normal science vs. revolutionary science


“For (Kuhn), there is no logic of discovery but rather
a process motivated by group struggle within a
scientific community.” (FNN, 17)
To Popper, the scientific community ought to be (and
mostly is) an “open society” in which no dominant
paradigm is ever sacred. (FNN, 17)
Prescriptive vs. Descriptive
Perspectives on Scientific Progress

Imre Lakatos – (Methodology of Scientific
Research Programs - MSRP)


Every scientific research program consists of a
“hard core” and a “protective belt” of
assumptions, conditions, hypotheses
Science progresses by means of “sophisticated
falsification”, which focuses on the comparative
evaluation of whole research programs
Assignment 2

(Due September 9): In approximately 1-2 single-spaced
pages, answer the following two questions.
1. Briefly summarize the basic features of the scientific method
discussed in your readings. What are some of the challenges
facing social scientists in applying the scientific method to
social/human/political behavior?
2. What is “scientific progress” according to Thomas Kuhn and
how and why/how does it occur? How do Kuhn’s thoughts on
scientific progress differ with those of Popper?
Objections to Science

Objections focus on the process of objective
empirical observation - critics claim that
objective empirical observation is not possible
(why?)
Objections to Science

Objections focus on the process of objective
empirical observation - critics claim that objective
empirical observation is not possible (why?)


observations are inherently tainted/distorted because they
need to be interpreted by human beings
observations are filtered by values, culture, personal
interests (Kuhn)

the extremists on this point call for abandoning science, or at
least call for a recognition of science as something other than
what it claims to be (almost equivalent to what Nachmias refers
to as the authoritarian mode)
A Modern Compromise?

Cognitive Instrumentalism –theories and
empirical data function as complementary
implements of investigation, and the only
rules that must be followed are that (Gordon):


theories should be coherent, logically sound and
articulate
Rely on observation data that are objectively
obtained and properly processed.
Challenges to the Practice of Science
in the Social Sciences

Inherent Uniqueness of Social Science?


Vienna Circle, Hempel, adhered to “unity of
science” thesis.
Others have since questioned the possibility that
the same (general) methods can be applied to
both natural and human phenomena
Challenges to the Practice of Science
in the Social Sciences

How are the social sciences different
(according to critics)?
Challenges to the Practice of Science
in the Social Sciences

How are the social sciences different (according to critics)?





social phenomena are not as uniform, or as constant overtime, as
natural phenomena (lack of generalizable laws)
social scientists are less able to isolate particular causal factors from
their general context than natural scientists (multiple causes; lack of
“control”)
Greater causal complexity (conditional relationships)
“Mental entities” – legitimate objects of scientific study?
Objective observation more problematic in social sciences due to
objects of study and potential implications of findings - unavoidable
entanglement between the values held by scientists and their research
procedures.
Challenges to the Practice of Science
in the Social Sciences

Why might values affect social research
more than natural science?
Challenges to the Practice of Science
in the Social Sciences

How (specifically) might values affect social
research (according to critics)?



Choosing research questions
Empirical classification
(conceptualization/measurement)
Conducting analysis
Challenges to the Practice of Science
in the Social Sciences

What to do about it?



Weber’s concept of Verstehen (also known as
interpretive sociology)
In a widely discussed book (The Idea of a Social
Science, and its Relation to Philosophy, 1958), Peter
Winch argues that the study of social phenomena must
be ‘philosophical’ rather than ‘scientific’, by which he
means that the proper way to comprehend such
phenomena is by conceptual analysis rather than by
means of empirical research.
Combating contamination due to values?
Scientific Method and Type of Method

Quantitative vs. Qualitative Methods – is one
approach inherently more “scientific” than the
other?
Scientific Method and Type of Method

Quantitative vs. Qualitative Methods – is one
approach inherently more “scientific” than the other?



KKV argue that “the same underlying logic provides the
framework for both”
Gerring makes a similar argument
RF: Two reasons why people do qualitative research in
political science


It is preferable because it does a better job of doing scientific
research (scientific qualitative research)
It is preferable because scientific research is inherently flawed
(non-scientific qualitative research)
The Research Process
(Scientific Method in Social Research)





Research Question
Theory and Hypotheses
Research Design
Operationalization (measurement)
Empirical Observation and Analysis
The Research Process
(Scientific Method in Social Research)





Research Question
Theory and Hypotheses
Research Design
Operationalization (measurement)
Empirical Observation and Analysis

Gerring (Concepts, Propositions, Research
Design)
Choosing a Research Question
(due Thursday, September 23rd)

Choose a question that can be studied scientifically

Avoid “should” questions (normative), historical
questions

Choose questions that require a theory (as a tentative
answer)

Choose questions that can be answered empirically
(large-N works better for this class)