Papa, King's College, Popper discussed on The Science Show

The Science Show
|

Automatic TRANSCRIPT

But I think it's a really good example that shows that it good scientific knowledge is not always knowledge of facts. It is sometimes knowledge that presupposes value, judgments and dot in. Itself does not make science biased and agenda driven in harmfully political. It makes a science relevant as it should be. Of course, it puts the scientists in a difficult position. Because they're so concerned as many private citizens are about the suffering of children. And yet you can't run experience. You can you mentioned Papa before you can't have say two hundred children who are not incarcerated as a control and two hundred people whom you study and allow to continue in detention, you can't do that way. So how can you deploy your science and be responsible at the same time in your view? What would you want if the scientists and psychologists that's another good reason not to operate with caricatures because the thought that the only possible causal knowledge that can come is knowledge that can come from randomized controlled trial. Is very harmful in this case, we wouldn't know anyways, much as we know about child development, if scientists weren't methodologically, opportunistic and method the logically pluralistic that means if they did not allow for different ways and different methods for finding out those methods are sometimes experiments and randomized control trials, but we should not Kwait signs with experimental knowledge. A lot of sciences are historical. They use case studies they use small and samples observational sciences. And it's another myth very harmful myth that. Somehow. There is no scientific knowledge without a certain very narrow precisely control study another criticism of poppas approaches that maybe half of biology would disappear near the observational kind the classifications. It's so hard to do experiments when you are. Doing that kind of collection of just straight information, and then putting it together and seeing patterns and drawing conclusions Darwin could hardly do any experiments his barnacles or snails, whereas butterflies beetles, but he was incredibly creative when it came to analyzing what was going on as a result of his observations, but Papa would have discounted some of that wouldn't ne-. Well, it's hard to know exactly what Popper thoughts because over time. I think he was very upset when he was being criticized for being too strict on scientific methods, and he said, no, no, no. That's not what I meant. What I meant is that we should be full affiliation. Est in spirit rather than always in letter. And there are lots of things we can talk about views, we should be attributing to proper, but in general the view that he's often praised for and that is so inspirational to many scientists that signs should aim at strict. Falsification tests, and nothing more is very harmful. So scientists never value free. Whatever it is once you wanted funded publicly or privately values are being applied. And so on it goes talk to Anna election Rover at King's College. Cambridge writing about the history and philosophy of science next week. The Sancho will be presented by call Smith while I'm in Washington DC, giving Mr. Trump advice on values and world peace production today by David Fisher. And Mark, Don, I'm Robin Williams..

Coming up next