DOC PREVIEW
MSU ISS 210 - Thinking About Our Origins

This preview shows page 1-2 out of 5 pages.

Save
View full document
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 5 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 5 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 5 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience

Unformatted text preview:

ISS 210 1st Edition Lecture 2 Outline of Last Lecture I. ParadigmsII. The Modern SynthesisIII. Why it MattersOutline of Current Lecture I. Cognitive StyleII. Arguing About FactsIII. Cognitive Style (2)IV. Types of Cognitive Style: MysticismV. Common SenseVI. Types of Cognitive Style: RationalismVII. Types of Cognitive Style: EmpiricismVIII. The “Controversy”IX. Characteristics of ScienceX. The Problem of SubjectivityXI. “Meaningless Science”XII. Teleological FunctionalismXIII. Creationism and CatholicismXIV. Public Acceptance of EvolutionXV. Non-Overlapping Magisteria (NOMA)Current LectureI. Cognitive Style– Three Different Styles that seek to answer different questions1. Mysticism2. Rationalism3. Empiricism– A set of “common sense” assumptions based on experience that we use to interpret events– These assumptions are:A largely unconsciousEstablish a “set of rules” to follow when arguing about “facts” II. Arguing About Facts– “Facts” are empirically verifiable– Can be perceived through our senses aided at times by sense extenders (fossil bones andDNA exist)– Can be experienced or verified by independent observers– An argument:Is a line of reason toward a conclusion Provides an interpretation or gives “meaning” to “facts” and allows us to make sense of themThe Validity of an argument rests on the validity of the assumptions to underlie it– Assumptions may be:Generally acceptedSubject to grave doubtAbsolutely untenable– Beware the Panglossian Paradigm (the Calvin Effect) to tell “just so” stories– Since we know the story ends, we interpret the earlier events as if their sole purpose was to reach that end – Landau– To be science, or notions must be testable, which can make Arithmetic Rules according to Abbott and CostelloIII. Cognitive Style– Characteristics:Experiences within each style are consistent and compatibleViewed from outside, the interpretation may seem contradictory or fictitious No simple transition from one cognitive style to anotherThe transition demands a radical transformation of consciousness or “leap”A change in the assumptionsIV. Types of Cognitive Style: Mysticism– Private knowledge based on faith that cannot be tested by any other means– The creation Research Society holds that ”the account of origins in Genesis is a factual presentation of simple historical truths”– The ultimate reality is revealed and “facts” must be fitted to it– “No amount of evidence – short of an appearance of a creator – can help evaluate the accuracy of such explanations”V. Common Sense– Conventional wisdom or “common sense” is the basis of culture, a system of shared understand– Appeals to the supernatural– Thunder and lighting is the Gitchi Manitou flying above the storm– “Racial” characteristics as product of creation– The Divine Right of Kings – God himself ordained that the King should rule over the society– Passes for truth with in a bounded universe – Flat Earth at the center VI. Types of Cognitive Style: Rationalism– Knowledge gained through the deductive method– Begin with observation– Use logic and reason to go on – Formal logic as critique– Basic tool for understanding human behavior in philosophy, the humanities and social science– Employed by the Enlightenment Philosophers to create a “liberal” society based on the respect for and the freedom of the individual– Sherlock Homes Rationalist– Based on Conan Doyle’s professor– Start with an observation and use reason and logic to come up with a solution (deductive method)– Dr. Lightfoot and bishop UssherVII. Types of Cognitive Style: Empiricism– Knowledge gained by sense observation and using the inductive (scientific) method– The inductive method: ObserveHypothesize (falsifiable)TestObserve– Testing properties of eraser  Gravity. (falls) VIII. The “Controversy” – There is among evangelical Christians for whom taking the Bible literally is an article of faith– They emerge in a pseudo-scientific debate to “falsely” scientific findings by pointing out gaps in theory– They offer their “truth” as an alternate that cannot be falsified– Demand “balanced treatment” and use local and State Boards of Education to introduce their belief couched in the terminology of science– When challenged in court under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment where the judges based on testimony provide a legal constructed definition of science, they lose. IX. Characteristics of Science1. Empirical- Knowledge of the physical world is through the sense aided by sense extenders (microscope)2. Cause and Effect- Relationships exist in which each event has a prior cause that is theoretically knowablePrimum movens- What or who is the “first mover” (Big Bang?) (Colonists from outer space?3. Materialist- Science proceeds “as if” material cause and effect is all there is to realityScience does not allow non-material cause and effect or it would case to function as a coherent system4. Objective- A theory must account for all the observed data or be revisedObject does not mean dispassionate Paradigms5. Tentative- All scientific theories are temporary, tentative mental constructs, subject to modification by revised perception of existing or new data Science may disprove or improve a theory but it will never prove it!Science is a contentious process and fiercly competitiveParadigm shiftsX. The Problem of Subjectivity– What is a subject?– What is an object?– What am I to you or you to me? – Social interaction requires an awareness of the feelings and motivations of others and may explain our uniquely human brain– Humans act for reasons (or at least rationalize our actions after the fact)– There is a subject step between observing and interpreting behavior– You interpret observed behavior based on:A set of assumptions derived from prior experience with that personSimilar experience with othersWhat you think your motive would be for acting that wayXI. “Meaningless Science”– Evolution: is the product of a million-million chance occurrences that could have had mas many different outcomes.Outcomes are the product of chance, not divine providence or some 19th century natural law– Science at odds with religion, while not rejecting evolution interprets biological evolutionXII. Teleological Functionalism: The Study of Final Causes– In philosophy, it is a


View Full Document

MSU ISS 210 - Thinking About Our Origins

Download Thinking About Our Origins
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view Thinking About Our Origins and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view Thinking About Our Origins 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?