Can Alternative Scientific Theories Challenge Scientific Rationality?
- PDF / 322,938 Bytes
- 21 Pages / 439.37 x 666.142 pts Page_size
- 5 Downloads / 213 Views
(0123456789().,-volV)(0123456789().,-volV)
ORIGINAL PAPER
Can Alternative Scientific Theories Challenge Scientific Rationality? Amir Hajizadeh1 Received: 21 March 2020 / Accepted: 12 October 2020 Ó Springer Nature B.V. 2020
Abstract One of the reasons for relativistic attitudes toward science is the impossibility of justifying scientists’ decisions in the face of alternative theories. According to this paper, an alternative theory can challenge scientific rationality only if the conditions of ‘‘methodological shortcomings of scientists’’ and the ‘‘existence of alternative theories’’ are met at a specific time. A commonly used technique to counter relativism is to try to supplement and equip scientists’ methodologies when confronted with alternative theories. However, this paper focuses on evaluating the possibility of ‘‘existence an alternative theory.’’ To this end, by referring to the different definitions of being alternative, we try to show that only ‘‘after the decision’’ and ‘‘the conversion of the scientific community’’ can a theory be considered justifiably ‘‘alternative.’’ Therefore, the relativistic claim is inconsistent because relativists must first accept the validity of scientists’ decisions to attribute being alternative to a theory. In this work, we provide evidence for our claim using a historical example. We also defend conservatism as a corollary of our discussion. Keywords Undecidability Incommensurability Underdetermination Alternative theory Unconceived theory Persistence anomaly
1 Introduction By believing in the privileged epistemological position of science, Rationalists believe that the method of science is independent of individual tastes and psychology, social tendencies, accidents and historical currents, ritual, and moral and aesthetic values, which lead scientists to make definitive evaluations of theories (Chalmers 1982, Chapter 9). Contrary to this line of thought, relativism about science claims that there will be a situation in which scientists would be unable to & Amir Hajizadeh [email protected] 1
Amirkabir University of Technology, 424 Hafez Ave, Tehran, Iran
123
Axiomathes
make a decision when alternative theories exist. (Baghramian and Carter 2019) In other words, there will always be critical situations in which the scientist’s decision to reject or accept an alternative theory cannot be justified in principle. Two branches of study fuel this relativistic approach. The first comes from historical studies, which were first proposed in Kuhn’s book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962). The heart of Kuhn’s idea is the incommensurability of different theories (or, in his words, different paradigms). This idea, along with assumed situations in which scientists are forced to choose between alternative theories, leads to relativism. As in an extreme interpretation, it leads to the impossibility of making a reasonable decision (Okasha 2011). The relativist conclusion, which emerges from Kuhn’s reading, can be written as follows: There is no unique
Data Loading...
