Prescribed title: What similarities and differences are there between Scientific and Historical Explanations?
Body 1: similarities
1: similarities between history and science explanation
Conformation bias: both history and science use this when forming a hypothesis or thesis
o Personal experience: TOK checks lab; my group disregarded certain information because we did not find it relevant to our thesis.|
o Physics labs: I have disregarded information that disproved one of my hypotheses because it believed that it was a fluke in the testing.
2
Ways of knowing (perception) is used in both areas of knowledge.
o History example: we can see that the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand is the spark that caused the First World War and use that as a key fact to explain why Austria-Hungary declared war against Serbia.
o Science example: we can feel that Heat is a byproduct of friction (rubbing our hands together.) / We can see that heat is a byproduct of friction by the way that a fire is stared when two pieces of wood are rubbed together and begin to smolder.
3
Implications of similarities:
o By creating a similarity between science and history explanations, may mean that the two can influence each other, such as we can predict historical events by the things leading up to them.
o Understanding = predicting
o Abel states that understanding an event does not mean that it can be predicted (science)
Body 2: differences
4
Reasoning: induction vs. deduction
o Sciences uses induction: scientific explanations use small specific details to create laws and theories.
• Ex) in physics we noticed the effects of gravity and tested the properties of it. This explanation of gravity is one of the key components of the General Theory of Relativity, which is used to explain the motion of all astrological bodies.
• Ex) we watched the movie “Judgment Day: intelligent design on trial” in TOK. In the movie, it explained that Charles Darwin developed his theory of evolution from first specifically studying the beaks of finches in the south pacific Galapagos Island.
o History uses deduction: Historical explanations are deduced from large events to figure out the causes of the effect.
• Ex) we now know that Osama bin Laden was the mastermind behind the September 11, 2001 World Trade Center terrorist attack, through deducing what the bombing style was, the motivations for attacking, and foreign threats.
5
Testability
o Facts are derived from testing
o Scientific explanations can be tested repeatedly. The whole point of science is to prove a hypothesis through repetitive testing
o Historical explanations cannot be repeated to prove that they are fact. We know the causes of single party states to rise such as Mussolini’s Italy, but we cannot determine if one will rise in the future by evaluating current conditions.
6
explanation influences
o Explanations in science and history are differently influenced.
o Ex) historical explanations are valid to the time era only when the background of the event has been thoroughly investigated.
• The assassination of Franz Ferdinand can only be understood as the spark of the First World War only after someone understands that there was political tension between Serbia and Austria-Hungary, and that there was an alliance between Germany and Austria-Hungary at the time of 1914.
o Sciences is independent from background information on the hypothesis that it is testing
• Ex) you do not need to know how the general theory of relativity was formulated and what the ideas are behind Albert Einstein’s reasoning in the formulas in order to test the equation.
Conclusion
7
There are more differences between scientific explanation and historical explanation than there are similarities.
Bibliography:
Keegan, John. The First World War. New York: Knopf, 1999. Print.
December 23, 2009
December 15, 2009
brave new world chapter 10
1. the director feels that unorthodoxy is worse than murder because murder may kill the individual, of which they can produce vast amounts more. but unorthodoxy taints the many, and threatens the workings of society itself, which is more valuable than the world government than one life. when Bernard returns to London, the director wants him to be transferred out of society and punished for his refusal of the social norm.
2. Bernard had brought Linda back with him and John which he claims is the directors son.
2. Bernard had brought Linda back with him and John which he claims is the directors son.
December 14, 2009
abel questions
1. science explains a fact by taking a general law and deriving the fact depending on the circumstances of the fact. fact is taken from the before and after of the event.
2. some common misconceptions about scientific explanation are:
a. science describes rather than explain. however, Abel claims that there is no distinct recognition between explanation and description
b. sciences explains the strange with the familiar. Abel states that it is the other way around with the familiar being explained by the strange
c. Science explanation is not the same as "understanding." Abel says that this knowledge is more like "knowledge by acquaintance" or like "knowing how."
d. a scientific explanation does not need to be casual. abel states that it may be a law of simultaneous existence rather than succession.
3. General law is deduced from a broader view rather than induced from experiment.
4. explanations depend on the person. since different knowers perceive different truths for some situations. there has to be a point were all perceived knowledge must be the same to have a knowledgeable situation.
5. explanatory reductions are economic ways of describing phenomena because these reductions simplify the concept without eliminating any parts of understanding
6. scientific explanation requires the concepts of a system because because each part of the system is combined to create a complete concept rather than a computer system finding the sum of the event.
7. the theory of emergence is used to explain the how anything never came into this world because one can predict the sum of something combined, even though there are two separate entities.
8. theory and observation are independent from each other because observation does not constitute a theory.
9. scientific explanation is theoretically identical to prediction because if something can be predicted, that means that there is an understanding to how that something works. Abel argues that explanation does not need to predict anything in understanding it.
10. Abel means that many factors influence the progression of science which does not make it clear cut, but can take many directions
11.the situations that require explanation are situations that seem "natural" to us.
12. the human element cannot be eliminated from the process of scientific explanation because we provide all the rules and create the laws.
12. this does hold true in history because history is always changing depending on new information being found
2. some common misconceptions about scientific explanation are:
a. science describes rather than explain. however, Abel claims that there is no distinct recognition between explanation and description
b. sciences explains the strange with the familiar. Abel states that it is the other way around with the familiar being explained by the strange
c. Science explanation is not the same as "understanding." Abel says that this knowledge is more like "knowledge by acquaintance" or like "knowing how."
d. a scientific explanation does not need to be casual. abel states that it may be a law of simultaneous existence rather than succession.
3. General law is deduced from a broader view rather than induced from experiment.
4. explanations depend on the person. since different knowers perceive different truths for some situations. there has to be a point were all perceived knowledge must be the same to have a knowledgeable situation.
5. explanatory reductions are economic ways of describing phenomena because these reductions simplify the concept without eliminating any parts of understanding
6. scientific explanation requires the concepts of a system because because each part of the system is combined to create a complete concept rather than a computer system finding the sum of the event.
7. the theory of emergence is used to explain the how anything never came into this world because one can predict the sum of something combined, even though there are two separate entities.
8. theory and observation are independent from each other because observation does not constitute a theory.
9. scientific explanation is theoretically identical to prediction because if something can be predicted, that means that there is an understanding to how that something works. Abel argues that explanation does not need to predict anything in understanding it.
10. Abel means that many factors influence the progression of science which does not make it clear cut, but can take many directions
11.the situations that require explanation are situations that seem "natural" to us.
12. the human element cannot be eliminated from the process of scientific explanation because we provide all the rules and create the laws.
12. this does hold true in history because history is always changing depending on new information being found
December 7, 2009
brave new world chapter 9
1. when lenina got back to the rest-house, she had taken six and a half grams of soma to complete her day that was full of queerness
2. Bernard asks Mustapha Mond for a permit to bring both John and Linda back to London, which he is granted.
3. when john is by lenina, he begins to recite Shakespeare's "romeo and juliet." this is significant because john eventually finds himself in love with lenina.
2. Bernard asks Mustapha Mond for a permit to bring both John and Linda back to London, which he is granted.
3. when john is by lenina, he begins to recite Shakespeare's "romeo and juliet." this is significant because john eventually finds himself in love with lenina.
December 6, 2009
perscribed title #8
"People need to believe that order can be glimpsed in the chaos of events" (adapted from John Gray, Heresies, 2004). In what ways and to what extent would you say this claim is relevant in at least two areas of knowledge?
We, as humans, are generally pattern makers. We feel the need to apply order to all things that we cannot explain. We seem to believe that we can bring order to things that are not orderly and understand matters that do not seem to be comprehendible. This belief of adding order to all things blends over into the ways of knowing and influences their course of knowledge. This is most prominent in the Natural sciences, and in History. In these two areas, we create meaning behind events and attempt to give a cause for the effect of the event.
Physics is a natural science that attempts to add order to events that seem out of place and random. This can be seen it the way physicists create equations for events that do not seem important to us as humans, or things that we cannot even see. Quantum mechanics, the dealing with subatomic particles, is something that physicists have tried to apply order to. In the way that it is described, particles at the subatomic level are unpredictable and can be in two places at once, making any kind of prediction impossible. These physicists that found this subatomic plane however created equations of probability to attempt to apply human order to it and to predict the appearance of these particles at a certain time. These physicists use induction to apply a general law to this theory of quantum mechanics, even though this plane of existence cannot be seen buy any kind of device. Through this, they have managed to show through equations and experiments that what equations they have written are valid in this field of study.
This is just one of many examples that famous physicists have done, but I have done this on a smaller scale in my high school physics class. Every few weeks we perform an experiment to determine some sort of general rule to a problem or to determine why there is energy lost in a certain machine process. We once were given a small engine to experiment with. We knew that energy was being lost due to friction, but we did not know how much energy. It was our goal to figure the amount lost because it was not know to this type of engine.
The other natural science that tries to apply order is chemistry. When I took chemistry, we learned that chemists discovered a way of combining elements. These men figured out that in order to combine and separate molecules, there needed to be the same number of different atoms on either side of an equation, where one side is equal to another. Even though this did not prove useful at an earlier time, the fact remains that when these chemists did not understand how some elements bonded with others and, in this confusion, they created a rule that explained the reason for these elements changing.
Even though we like to apply order to science and scientific phenomena, there are problems with wanting to apply order to this area of knowledge. One of the key characteristics of science is that it is always changing. Because it is always changing, there is no definite equation or theory, which means that these theories and equations can be disproved in the near future, proving that the efforts of some men and women were completely wrong. These happen when we discover new facts about that field that conflict with the given knowledge. For example, in physics we learned that light was accepted as a wave, but through experiments we determined that light also behaved as a particle. This paradox has caused many shifts in the theory of light and is still split to this day.
I have had this same problem when working in my science classes through out high school, to a lesser extent. For example, we were asked to write a general formula for an application in physics regarding the motion of a spring. I had written a formula that worked for predicting the position of the mass oscillating on the spring. It worked when I tested it. However, the next step involved adding another factor and having the equation still produce the same graph. When I added this new factor, my equation was off and I had to rewrite the entire equation over with different values for everything.
Another area of knowledge that we order can be seen in its chaos is mathematics. Math is close to physics in that it is used to develop patterns and laws with numbers which are tested. Some examples of these are the Pythagorean Theorem, and the Einstein’s theory of relativity. The way that these theorems came around is by the need to give order. The Pythagorean Theorem was conceived by Pythagoras who discovered that when the two smaller sides of a triangle are squared, they will equal the square of the hypotenuse. This would give an n accurate way of building instead of just improvising while you go.
During the writing of my math internal assessment, we were asked to find a general statement to solve for a logarithmic pattern. Even though I had solved the general statement, it was expected to only work for whole values. However, I thought that it would be unusual if the pattern only applied to whole numbers. So I tested it with different values giving uneven numbers and the general rule still applied.
Even though we apply order to all things around us, we generally do not know if it is organizing the chaos there is. We still have problems and are constantly trying to solve them, with no luck.
In chaos, we apply order because we believe that order can be applied. This is the main reason why we keep trying. Through the natural sciences we have found was of solving energy problems as well as applying rules to things that seem random and chaotic. We do this because we are pattern makers and we see things as needing to be organized and set straight. However, being a maker of patterns and applying order, we do have the habit of applying things that could lead to more chaos instead of creating order. even though we can screw up by applying faulty order to chaos, we still believe that order can be applied to everything.
We, as humans, are generally pattern makers. We feel the need to apply order to all things that we cannot explain. We seem to believe that we can bring order to things that are not orderly and understand matters that do not seem to be comprehendible. This belief of adding order to all things blends over into the ways of knowing and influences their course of knowledge. This is most prominent in the Natural sciences, and in History. In these two areas, we create meaning behind events and attempt to give a cause for the effect of the event.
Physics is a natural science that attempts to add order to events that seem out of place and random. This can be seen it the way physicists create equations for events that do not seem important to us as humans, or things that we cannot even see. Quantum mechanics, the dealing with subatomic particles, is something that physicists have tried to apply order to. In the way that it is described, particles at the subatomic level are unpredictable and can be in two places at once, making any kind of prediction impossible. These physicists that found this subatomic plane however created equations of probability to attempt to apply human order to it and to predict the appearance of these particles at a certain time. These physicists use induction to apply a general law to this theory of quantum mechanics, even though this plane of existence cannot be seen buy any kind of device. Through this, they have managed to show through equations and experiments that what equations they have written are valid in this field of study.
This is just one of many examples that famous physicists have done, but I have done this on a smaller scale in my high school physics class. Every few weeks we perform an experiment to determine some sort of general rule to a problem or to determine why there is energy lost in a certain machine process. We once were given a small engine to experiment with. We knew that energy was being lost due to friction, but we did not know how much energy. It was our goal to figure the amount lost because it was not know to this type of engine.
The other natural science that tries to apply order is chemistry. When I took chemistry, we learned that chemists discovered a way of combining elements. These men figured out that in order to combine and separate molecules, there needed to be the same number of different atoms on either side of an equation, where one side is equal to another. Even though this did not prove useful at an earlier time, the fact remains that when these chemists did not understand how some elements bonded with others and, in this confusion, they created a rule that explained the reason for these elements changing.
Even though we like to apply order to science and scientific phenomena, there are problems with wanting to apply order to this area of knowledge. One of the key characteristics of science is that it is always changing. Because it is always changing, there is no definite equation or theory, which means that these theories and equations can be disproved in the near future, proving that the efforts of some men and women were completely wrong. These happen when we discover new facts about that field that conflict with the given knowledge. For example, in physics we learned that light was accepted as a wave, but through experiments we determined that light also behaved as a particle. This paradox has caused many shifts in the theory of light and is still split to this day.
I have had this same problem when working in my science classes through out high school, to a lesser extent. For example, we were asked to write a general formula for an application in physics regarding the motion of a spring. I had written a formula that worked for predicting the position of the mass oscillating on the spring. It worked when I tested it. However, the next step involved adding another factor and having the equation still produce the same graph. When I added this new factor, my equation was off and I had to rewrite the entire equation over with different values for everything.
Another area of knowledge that we order can be seen in its chaos is mathematics. Math is close to physics in that it is used to develop patterns and laws with numbers which are tested. Some examples of these are the Pythagorean Theorem, and the Einstein’s theory of relativity. The way that these theorems came around is by the need to give order. The Pythagorean Theorem was conceived by Pythagoras who discovered that when the two smaller sides of a triangle are squared, they will equal the square of the hypotenuse. This would give an n accurate way of building instead of just improvising while you go.
During the writing of my math internal assessment, we were asked to find a general statement to solve for a logarithmic pattern. Even though I had solved the general statement, it was expected to only work for whole values. However, I thought that it would be unusual if the pattern only applied to whole numbers. So I tested it with different values giving uneven numbers and the general rule still applied.
Even though we apply order to all things around us, we generally do not know if it is organizing the chaos there is. We still have problems and are constantly trying to solve them, with no luck.
In chaos, we apply order because we believe that order can be applied. This is the main reason why we keep trying. Through the natural sciences we have found was of solving energy problems as well as applying rules to things that seem random and chaotic. We do this because we are pattern makers and we see things as needing to be organized and set straight. However, being a maker of patterns and applying order, we do have the habit of applying things that could lead to more chaos instead of creating order. even though we can screw up by applying faulty order to chaos, we still believe that order can be applied to everything.
December 3, 2009
brave new world chapter 8
1. John's upbringing is harsh and cruel by standards of today. his mother neglected him to be another man, he was abused by the others ans cursed by the Indians simply because he was the son hf Linda. i think that John claims that he is alone because there is no one that can sympathize with his situation. all the others judge him and do not even attempt to know him. Bernard instead sympathizes with John because Bernard feels that he is alone back in London.
2. John says "o brave new world" because it is a lien from Shakespeare. john had been reading Shakespeare and loved the way that he wrote plays. the notion of "brave new world" is that Bernard is going to take John back to London with him, which an entirely different world to John.
2. John says "o brave new world" because it is a lien from Shakespeare. john had been reading Shakespeare and loved the way that he wrote plays. the notion of "brave new world" is that Bernard is going to take John back to London with him, which an entirely different world to John.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
