Font size
WorksheetsReview weeks 1-8
Total questions: 21
Worksheet time: 45mins
What's the problem of confirmation?
Figuring out the nature of explanation and logic
Figuring out the nature of why the future resembles the past
Figuring out the nature of scientific behavior
Figuring out the nature between theories and observational evidence that supports the theories
Recall the context of justification and the context of discovery. What's the context of discovery?
When a scientists performs an experiment and finds out the theory is refuted
When a scientists performs an experiment and finds out the theory is confirmed
The context in which scientific creativity happens and scientific theories are generated (ex: staring at a fire and thinking of dna sequences)
When a scientists discovers something new
An argument is deductively valid if and only if
it is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false
it is possible for the premises and the conclusion to be false
it is impossible for a true conclusion to follow from true presumes
the conclusion is followed from premises that are observationally supported and true about the world
Affirming the consequent is
a deductively valid form of argument
an invalid form of argument
None of the above
Denying the consequent is
A deductively valid form of argument
An invalid form of argument
None of the above
All black cats are cats; all black cats are spooky is an example of the linguistic _______-_______ distinction. All bachelors are unmarried men; Iran won the FIFA world cup is an example of the epistemological ________-________ distinction.
According to the verifiability theory of meaning, which of the following would be meaningless?
All ravens are black
All nonblack things are nonravens
God is omniscient (all knowing)
People born in July are Leos and rude
All of the above
The meaning of sentences depends on the method of their verification. Knowing the meaning of a sentence is knowing how to test for its truth or falsehood. If a sentence has no method of verification, it is meaningless. “Verification” for the positivists is defined as observations one has or may have in principle, so it is broadly construed. We may substitute “verifiability” for “testability,” since what the positivists had in mind were tests to determine the truth or falsehood of sentences. What all this means is that experience is the source not only of knowledge, but also of meaning. This is the verifiability theory of meaning.
True
False
Did Hempel believe in verificationism?
Yes
No
The Semmelweis case illustrated that
Deductive logic isn't the right logic to model science
Scientists may assume some auxiliary hypotheses when testing one central hypothesis/theory
Scientists in a desperate effort to save the theory start using ad hoc hypotheses
Washing your hands is important
An auxiliary hypothesis is a hypothesis that is proposed in an attempt to save the central hypothesis from seeming refutable evidence. An ad hoc hypothesis is an implicit helping hypothesis or assumption that is also tested when the central hypothesis is tested.
True
False
The ___________________ is the problem of finding a way to justify rationally our inferences from the past to the future, that is, why are we justified in thinking that the future will resemble the past.
The Ravens Paradox showed that
Ravens are paradoxical creatures
Inductive logic might not be the right way to model scientific reasoning
Nonblack things that are non-ravens confirms 'all ravens are black'
White shoes do not confirm 'all ravens are black.'
all of the above
For the Bayesian, we should update our beliefs/hypotheses via Bayes' Theorem: P(h|e)=[P(e|h)*P(h)]/P(e). If so, then when would they say that the evidence (e) confirms the hypothesis (h)? Please write this out in the symbolic form. I am looking for an inequality equation. Thank you.
Karl Popper was a falsificationist, which had which of the following roles?
it solved the demarcation problem, or the problem of demarcating science from pseudoscience.
it dodged the problem of induction.
it outlined a theory of how science changes.
All of the above.
The problem of demarcation is the problem of
verifying what is meaningful and what is not meaningful
figuring out what is and is not science
figuring out what does and does not exist
figuring out what we can and cannot know
An analytic proposition ________; a synthetic proposition _________. An a priori statement ________; an a posteriori statement ________________.
Can be known without experience; says something beyond the subject. Has a predicate that is contained in the subject; must known be via experience.
must known be via experience; has a predicate that is contained in the subject. Says something beyond the subject; can be known without experience.
Says something beyond the subject; has a predicate that is contained in the subject. Must be known via experience; can be known without experience.
Has a predicate that is contained in the subject; says something beyond the subject. Can be known without experience; Must be known via experience.
The thesis that a theory is scientific if and only if it is potentially refutable via some possible observational evidence or some experiment.
What is fallibilism?
All propositions of science are false.
We can never be rationally justified in thinking that the future resembles the past.
the thesis that a theory is scientific if and only if it has the potential to be falsified (ie refuted) by some possible evidence/observation.
We can never obtain mathematical certainty about science or facts, but we may accept them regardless.
Can one be a fallibilist but not a falsificationist?
Yes
No
Bonus: For Thomas Kuhn, scientific change involves which of the following phases?
normal science, semantic commensurability, paradigms, revolutions
pre-paradigm science, anomalies, relativism, problem solving power.
pre-paradigm science, problem solving power, anomalies, revolutions
pre-paradigmatic science, paradigm science, normal science, anomalies, crisis science, revolution, then a new paradigm
pre-paradigmatic science, paradigm, problem solving power, incommensurability, crisis science, revolution, and then a new paradigm.
