What is a theory - Essay Example

TABLE OF CONTENT Introduction Relationship between phenomenal science and theoretical science Nature of Scientific theories 2 Various views on scientific theories 4 Empirical evaluation of a theory 6 Conclusion 7 Selected bibliography 8 Introduction There are two stages of science growth according to community of philosophers. These are phenomenal stage and theoretical stage. The phenomenal stage also known as empirical stage is characterized by use of inductive methods, where acquisition of knowledge is a matter of collection, elimination and correlation. Roger Bacon (13th century), Francis Bacon (16th century) were key proponents of this stage of science. In this scientific stage, experiments and accumulation of empirical data played a major role in arriving at general statements. It was a down-up approach of knowledge acquisitions where a wider base of empirical data was used to precisely make predictions and explain phenomena. On the other hand, theoretical stage is characterized by use of abstract statements that not only explain observed phenomenal in a unified manner, but also yield predictions far beyond the reach of inductive methods. Theories according to Hung are produced by mind just the way empirical data are a product of our common senses. The scientists who create such theories are called theoreticians and the field of science is full of them such as Newton, Dalton, and Franklin just to mention a few1. Contrastingly, the use of theories in search of knowledge is a top-down approach2. Relationship Between Phenomenal Science and Theoretical Science. Scientists believe that an empirical generalization of a phenomenal no matter how many instances of confirmations is not enough to warrant scientific conclusions. The generalizations are not trustworthy unless they are supported by a theory. Otherwise the generalization statements may look like a mare fantasy of our senses and ad hoc conclusions. Theories occupy a central place in advancement and development of science without which scientific discovery may be seen as brute irrational facts. Hung argues that, theories make science rational and aesthetically pleasing3. Nature of Scientific Theories In science, it means an explanation or model that covers a substantial group of occurrences in nature and has been confirmed by a substantial number of experiments and observations. A theory may have one statements or a number of statements. Most scientific theories are enthymemes. This means they contain hidden premises called auxiliary hypotheses which help us understand the implications of a theory. For instance, the statement "Earth is round", if a ship should sail away over the horizon, the hull disappear before the masthead does, is invalid unless supported by an extra premises such as "light travel in a straight line". Normally this extra premise is omitted in many theories as scientists take them as too obvious to warrant any explanation4. A theory is more general and better verified than a hypothesis. Thus can be referred to as a theoretical hypothesis. Unlike empirical generalizations, theories are free inventions of mind. For instance Newton devised theory of gravity to explain why things fall down; Dalton invented a theory of atoms to explain why certain things can combine with others. In all the above theories, none had access to these new phenomena such as gravitation force or the micro particles of atoms world. However, through their imaginations they were able to come up with this wonderful discovery of the invisible world. Consequently, one may ask; why then should scientists accept this imaginative creativity of scientists and refute the imaginations of a lay person It should be noted that scientists imaginations is different from a lay person dreams of unreal world since scientific theories had passed the acid test of logical feature that affirm a good theory. Not all theories are good per se, therefore, there is need to investigate the logical features of a good theory. According to Hung, a good theory must explain a phenomenal and this explanation must be true. However, truth is elusive and other features must come in handy. Another feature of a good theory is its strong unifying power. A theory that is good can explain a number of phenomena. For example; Newton theory of gravity explains a number of phenomena such as why telestial objects fall downwards, why they fall with a nearly uniform speed, why pendulum swings with a regular pace and many others. Ernst Mach (1833-1916) calls this aspect of theory 'economy of thought'. A good theory therefore, must have an immense explanatory power coupled with unifying power. High unifying power promotes and expands our understanding of phenomenal. If a theory fails this test then it is a bad theory. In addition, a good theory must posses a great deal of in-breath predictive power. It must have the ability to spread its wings of explanations to enable us predict behavior of various phenomenal with similar characteristics. A good example here is the droplets theory; apart from this theory explaining that a rainbow has seven colors, it helps us predict the possibility of secondary and tertiary rainbows and their possible color arrangements. We can also predict the occurrence of such rainbow over waterfalls and garden sprinkler. In-breath prediction power should be accompanied with in-depth prediction power in a theory. This is the power of a theory to help us make in-depth prediction of minute phenomenal within the same phenomenal under investigation. It should be able to take us beyond what we see and perceive. Through the in-depth prediction power of many theories, many formulas and equations have become a common feature in science for example; Force (N) = Mass x 10m/s is associated with law of gravity. Various Views of Scientific Theories. According to classical thinkers, science explain reality in terms of two languages namely; observation language and the theoretical language. The observation language consists of commonsensical terms such as color terms, shape etc. These terms are said to be related to our sense experience. On the other hand, theoretical language employs terms such as wavelength, atoms, gravity and so on. These terms are inventions of mind for the explanation of observed phenomena5. What these terms portray is not directly observable and Kant (1724-1804) labeled these observable things as noumena6. Needless to say, classical thinkers believed that the main aim of science is to discover these noumena which are responsible for the production of the phenomena. The noumena are the hidden mechanisms that cause the phenomena, and thus noumena constitute the real nature of reality. Theoretical language is therefore, developed by scientists through the inventions of abstract scientific theories. These theories purport to describe real-nature of things; thus classical thinkers may prefer to refer to theories as real-nature theories. A scientific real- nature theory has two parts namely:-. 1. Internal principles- these are statements found in a theory and are in theoretical language explaining the nature of noumena, what they are like, how they behave and so on. 2. Bridge principles- these principles asserts how noumena is related to the phenomena. It should be noted that internal principles are central to a theory. However, since noumena are not observable a theory must have the bridging principles that relate them to the observable phenomena. For instance, a real-nature theory may look like this: "the color red correspond to the wavelength 6,0684angstroms". Other real-nature theories includes 'The Caloric Theory of Heat' Since the time of Galileo, empiricists advocated the use of experiments to ascertain truth about the material world. According to them, science should not start from a priori as in case with rationalist but rather from sense experience. Bacon (1561-1626) rejected speculations and advocated for the use of a correct scientific method in truth acquisition. For him, a good scientific method involves the following steps; observation, classifications, generalization and testing of the empirical data under investigation. Popper another leading empiricist, down played the empiricism advanced by Bacon with his famous deductivism method. For him, the best method of scientific investigation is what he called Hypothetico-deductive method. According to him, one cannot just collect data from the field and make generalization-scientists must be selective. This selectiveness is what he advocated to be guided by a given hypothesis. This way data collected could be tested to see if they confirm a hypothesis or reject it7. Realists concurs that theories explain real entities. However, a necessary condition for the existence of these theoretical entities is that theories responsible for the introduction of these entities must be good both empirically and logically. Some realists are more radical in their understanding of reality. For them, scientific picture is the only real one whereas the commonsense picture is misleading and does not exist thus should be relinquished. Instrumentalism is quite opposite of this premise, instrumentalism assert that what our common sense perceive is the reality whereas abstract terms and things postulated by scientific theories are mere construct of mind and they don't exist. This position agrees with phenomenologists position such as Ernst Mach, Hume among others who said that what we are empirically given is mere sensations of various kinds8. Empirical Evaluation of a Theory In order for any theory to stand the test of time it should be empirically evaluated. One of such a test is called conditional test implications. This test is in the form of J if K then L. In some instances theories that have statements that compete with each other invites a crucial test. This is a test that favors one theory and definitely rule out the other. These statements might be either 'contrary' (both can be false but only one can be true) or 'contradictory' (only one can be true while the other false and vice versa). 19th century witnessed such competing theories. There was kinetic theory competing with caloric fluid theory, phlogiston theory competed with oxygen theory among others. According to Popper, a good theory must be testable. Science should not only aim at truth but high content of it. He stressed that science should aim at moving from statement of low content to statement of high content of truth9. This way, science will progress through replacement of hypotheses with new and better ones. Empirical evaluation is key to these developments of science and every theory should be subjected to vigorous testing to prove its validity. Conclusion In a nutshell, we must all appreciate the pleasant exercise of theorizing. The major aim of theories is to explain things. Through theories we can also satisfy our intellect and have practical gains that have been the main driving force behind world history of development and civilization10. However, as Popper once pointed out, the world of science and theorizing can only maintain its prowess and respect in knowledge acquisitions by making all theories open for evaluations. Ad hoc revisions of theories that are solely done to protect a theory under test from unfavorable test results and possible refutation should not be allowed at all cost. If such moves are permitted, tests will not act as arbitrator between truth and falsity. It is a move a move not for the advancement of knowledge, a direction science is not ready to take. Selected Bibliography Hung, H, C, E. The Nature of Science: Problems and Perspectives. Johannesburg, Wadsworth Publishing Company: 1997. Sowa J, F. Knowledge Representation: Logical, Philosophical, and Computational Foundations. Pacific Grove, CA Brooks/Cole: 2000 Silverman, L. K. "Personality and learning styles of gifted children". In J. VanTassel-Baska (Ed.), Excellence in educating gifted & talented learners (2nd ed., pp. 29-65). Denver, Love: 1998. Pickstone, V, J. Ways of Knowing: A new History of Science, Technology and Medicine, Chicago, University of Chicago Press: 2001. Rouse, J. Knowledge and Power: Towards a Political Philosophy of Science. Cornell University Press :1987. Heron, J, & Reason, P. A Participatory Inquiry Paradigm. Qualitative Inquiry, 3(3),: 1997, 274-294 Wilson, F, L. "Science and Human Value: Aristotle", Rochester Institute of Technology, accessed 9th November 2006; available from http://www.rit.edu/flwstv/aristotle1.html; Internet. The Philosophers' Lighthouse, "Aristotle's Thoughts on Knowledge, accessed 8th November 2006; available from; http://library.thinkquest.org/18775/aristotle/knowar.htm; Internet. Read More