When we are motioning through our lives, many types of beliefs and theories seem appealing. Even the information that I present here is not offered with the expectation that readers believe me because I am an expert on a given topic. The evaluation and assessment of a theory is an integral part of navigating the social cosmos. There are specific techniques to accomplish determining what beliefs and theories are worth believing and how to evaluate and assess them.
It is important to know that the things we believe make sense because if they don't our beliefs will cause us problems. To understand the philosophy of science, will give us tools to determine which beliefs make sense.
Photo Source: Pexels.com www.spacex.com
Theodore Schick, Jr and Lewis Vaughn offer a very useful breakdown they call the Criteria of Adequacy. In their book, 'How to Think About Weird Things,' they demonstrate how well a hypothesis or theory enhances our understanding of the cosmos by fulfilling these criteria.
"The results of scientific inquiry are never final and conclusive but are always provisional and open. No scientific hypothesis can be conclusively confirmed because the possibility of someday finding evidence to the contrary can't be ruled out. Scientific hypotheses always go beyond the information given...not only explain what has been discovered, they also predict what will be discovered...no guarantee that these predictions will come true, we can never be absolutely sure that a scientific hypothesis is true." (Schick and Vaughn 2007 6th edition HTAWT 166)
The Criteria of Adequacy:
1. Predictability
A theory is best when we are able to use it pragmatically to predict things in the future. If a theory is unable to offer us any predictive value, it limits our ability to benefit from using or believing it. If I take a medicine, my doctor will predict that the medicine will cure my illness. The doctor is using a theory which has a basis in predictability relative to my illness and a correlating medicine. The doctor believes that the cause of taking the medicine will produce the effect of curing my ailment.
2. Falsification
Karl Popper, 1902-1994, developed the addition of falsification to the philosophy of science when he sought to solve the problem of induction. A standard example of this problem is if, in my experience, all I observe is white swans, I may conclude that "All Swans are White." The the certainty in this statement is an issue because I cannot derive absolute truths from my observation of events through 'inductive reasoning.' When I observe particular instances of phenomena and make a general claim, using inductive reasoning, I can only be probably certain of the truth claim. As soon as one travels to Australia, we will find that black swans exist and hence has now disproved the statement, "All swans are White."
Popper suggested that instead of attempting to confirm what I already know to be true, it is more accurate for me to attempt to disprove the claim I am making, hence 'falsify.' When we are constructing theories or claims, our trust in them is best proportioned to the degree that they can be proven wrong or tested. If I am unable to test whether a theory or belief is true or false, my reasons for believing it have less strength than if I was able to test the theory. When I construct a theory that is falsifiable, I structure the statements of the theory in a way where I am attempting to prove the theory wrong. This is done so I am able to make sure that the statements which compose my theory can be reduced to those that are consistent with reality.
If the statement is falsified, it is discarded as soon as one finds an instance that contradicts it. If we are seeking to confirm our statements as a means of proof, there is no amount of seeking examples or evidence that is equivalent to finding one example that contradicts our theory. It is much more efficient to find at least one example of evidence that disproves a theory than attempt to search all of the cosmos for eternity for confirming evidence. Constructing a theory in a falsifiable way makes it easier to determine whether the theory is an accurate representation of reality, for it is built on the axiom of its disapproval. Confirming our theories can ignore evidence that would require the theory be revised.
An example of a poor theory would be: 'At night, I believe that there are invisible leprechauns taking my change from my night table. I can't set up a camera because they cannot be seen or detected through infrared light.' The problem is there is no way for me to test or observe the existence of the little guys to determine if my claim is true or false.
An example of a good theory: 'If I raise the temperature of the water to 150 degrees Celsius, the water will boil.' This is a good theory because I am able to not only observe the phenomena but also test whether or not my theory is true.
3. Simplicity
Simplicity in the philosophy of science is to not make assumptions in our beliefs or our theories. When constructing theories, we want to make as few assumptions as possible. William of Ockham in the 12th and 13th century stated 'Plurality must never be posited without necessity,' meaning that it is best to make as few assumptions when we are constructing an explanation of an event. The more assumptions that I include in my explanation of things, the higher the chance that I can be wrong and the more difficult it is to test the hypothesis. The phrase 'Occam's Razor' has been developed from William of Ockham's insistence on eliminating assumptions in hypothesis.
4. Scope
When a hypothesis or theory has a larger scope, it systematizes and unifies our existing knowledge as well offers more explanation and predictive power. The criterion of scope is essentially important because it greatly deepens our understanding of what we already know and what we do not know about the cosmos. A larger scope includes more information and is more useful.
5. Coherence
The last Criteria of Adequacy is whether or not the theory in question contradicts the already established set of facts and existing knowledge. If a theory has a different explanation of events and contradicts entire bodies of science, like physics or chemistry, the theory would also have to explain why those bodies of science are also incorrect. The more a theory fits with the preexisting information or knowledge we have, the more likely it is correct.
Theory of Mental Health
I have developed a theory of mental health that is simple, coherent, falsifiable, offers predictability and is broad in scope. Simply, if we focus on a set of basic skills and establish certain practices in our culture, I predict that most psychological disorders/illnesses (broad theoretical scope) can become a historical phenomena or part of the past. The cultural model would accomplish this through preventing the onset of mental health issues by immediately responding to behaviour that can lead to mental illness from one's social network and society in general. My philosophy of mental health can be tested by following the practices that are coherent with the existing evidence-based practice of psychotherapy, clinical psychology and measuring the mental state of participating members.
I do not act as a psychotherapist or clinical psychologist but focus on the philosophy of mental health. The philosophy of mental health includes a unification and understanding of the philosophy of science in psychology, psychotherapy, and psychiatry. My theory is much broader in social and cultural scope than existing mental health theories.
If as a society, we truly care about solving the problems of mental illness, it would be more effective if we all become educated and practice the evidence-based skills within psychotherapy, psychology and critical thinking. Once our global culture values the practices of proactive mental health, then society as a whole can take responsibility for its members mental health.
AJ 7.2.18, 14.3.18, 16.8.18, 27.3.20
Amazon Link to Schick and Vaughn's 'How to Think About Weird Things':
https://www.amazon.ca/How-Think-About-Weird-Things/dp/0078038367/ref=dp_ob_title_bk
ISBN: 978-0078038365
© Achilles Atlas Justice and achillesjustice.com, 2018 - 2021. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Achilles Atlas Justice and achillesjustice.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.
Hozzászólások