Labs start this week Inquiry 1 proposal due in lab next week Class communication via Blackboard and/or webpage

Similar documents
UGS 303- Research Methods Dr. Stuart Reichler

From the Greek Oikos = House Ology = study of

Now you know what a hypothesis is, and you also know that daddy-long-legs are not poisonous.

Controlled Experiments

THE SCIENTIFIC PROCESS C H A P T E R 3

Content Area Variations of Academic Language

Semantic Entailment and Natural Deduction

There are two common forms of deductively valid conditional argument: modus ponens and modus tollens.

Darwinist Arguments Against Intelligent Design Illogical and Misleading

A Quick Review of the Scientific Method Transcript

Strong Inference: The WAY of SCIENCE T HOMAS B. KINRAIDE R. FORD D ENISON

Business Research: Principles and Processes MGMT6791 Workshop 1A: The Nature of Research & Scientific Method

PHI 1700: Global Ethics

The way we convince people is generally to refer to sufficiently many things that they already know are correct.

Defining Science The Scientific Method

Outline Map. Europe About Name Class Date


Critique of Proposed Revisions to Science Standards Draft 1

Chapter 2 Science as a Way of Knowing: Critical Thinking about the Environment

Civic Engagement and Life at the end of life: four stories that lead to questions Robert Pollack Professor of Biological Sciences, Columbia University

The Abstracts of Plenary Lectures

What. A New Way of Thinking...modern consciousness.

Defining Science: The Scientific Method

Scripture. Parable of the Farmer Scattering Seeds GOING DEEPER. Parables: A Closer Look at the Stories of Jesus Week 1 of 5

The Odd Couple. Why Science and Religion Shouldn t Cohabit. Jerry A. Coyne 2012 Bale Boone Symposium The University of Kentucky

C. S. Lewis The Problem of Pain

Philosophy of Science. Ross Arnold, Summer 2014 Lakeside institute of Theology

Is Negative Corpus Really a Corpse? John W. Reis, of Smith Moore Leatherwood P: E:

FINAL EXAM REVIEW SHEET. objectivity intersubjectivity ways the peer review system is supposed to improve objectivity

Establishing premises

Experimental Design. Introduction

Religious belief, hypothesis and attitudes

Foundationalism Vs. Skepticism: The Greater Philosophical Ideology

What is science? Inflationary use of science. science < scientia < sciens < scio, scire

What Is Science? Mel Conway, Ph.D.

The problems of induction in scientific inquiry: Challenges and solutions. Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction Defining induction...

Introduction to Evolution. DANILO V. ROGAYAN JR. Faculty, Department of Natural Sciences

I Don't Believe in God I Believe in Science

World without Design: The Ontological Consequences of Natural- ism , by Michael C. Rea.

Reference Texts: Paul Scott Wilson, Editor. The New Interpreter s Handbook of Preaching

The First Scientific Proof Of God:: Reveals God's Intelligent Design And A Modern Creation Theory By George Shollenberger

Chapter 16: The Theory Decides What Can Be Observed Quantum Physics 101

Assessing Confidence in an Assurance Case

SAMPLE COURSE OUTLINE PHILOSOPHY AND ETHICS GENERAL YEAR 11

Strictly speaking, all our knowledge outside mathematics consists of conjectures.

The evolution of the meaning of SCIENCE. SCIENCE came from the latin word SCIENTIA which means knowledge.

Alchemistry. in sequential order as part of the larger historical context, the two seem natural neighbors in the

Chapter 20 Testing Hypotheses for Proportions

Already Gone by Ken Ham & Britt Beemer

Does the Bible Conflict with Science?

SUPPOSITIONAL REASONING AND PERCEPTUAL JUSTIFICATION

1. Introduction Formal deductive logic Overview

The Problem with Complete States: Freedom, Chance and the Luck Argument

If I were to give an award for the single best idea anyone has ever had, I d give it to... Darwin

The Qualiafications (or Lack Thereof) of Epiphenomenal Qualia

Inductive inference is. Rules of Detachment? A Little Survey of Induction

Mementos from Excursion 2 Tour II: Falsification, Pseudoscience, Induction (first installment, Nov. 17, 2018) 1

ECONOMETRIC METHODOLOGY AND THE STATUS OF ECONOMICS. Cormac O Dea. Junior Sophister

A Layperson s Guide to Hypothesis Testing By Michael Reames and Gabriel Kemeny ProcessGPS

1 Scientific Reasoning

Symposia on Gender, Race and Philosophy

Why Good Science Is Not Value-Free

The Appeal to Reason. Introductory Logic pt. 1

THE INFERENCE TO THE BEST

Yoga and Meditation Retreat in Lovina Bali

DEFEASIBLE A PRIORI JUSTIFICATION: A REPLY TO THUROW

It is One Tailed F-test since the variance of treatment is expected to be large if the null hypothesis is rejected.

CONTENTS A SYSTEM OF LOGIC

Law as a Social Fact: A Reply to Professor Martinez

Argument as reasoned dialogue

Appendix: The Logic Behind the Inferential Test

PLEASE DO NOT WRITE ON THIS QUIZ

About Type I and Type II Errors: Examples

Observation and categories. Phil 12: Logic and Decision Making Fall 2010 UC San Diego 10/8/2010

Commentary on Professor Tweyman's 'Hume on Evil' Pheroze S. Wadia Hume Studies Volume XIII, Number 1 (April, 1987)

The Answer from Science

FCAT READING SKILL Distinguishing Facts and Opinions

Science and Creation Science

Why is life on Earth so incredibly diverse yet so strangely similar? Similarities among Diverse Forms. Diversity among Similar Forms

Russell s Problems of Philosophy

Naturalism vs. Conceptual Analysis. Marcin Miłkowski

Philosophy 1100 Introduction to Ethics. Lecture 3 Survival of Death?

Progression of the Maharishi Science of Consciousness Points in Each Course

SCIENCE Strong Inference

Has not Science Debunked Biblical Christianity?

SCIENCE AND CHRISTIANITY IN HARMONY? L. J. Gibson Geoscience Research Institute

Observation and Categories. Review

PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE PHIL 145, FALL 2017

Philosophy and Logical Syntax (1935)

Ch01. Knowledge. What does it mean to know something? and how can science help us know things? version 1.5

CHAPTER 16: IS SCIENCE LOGICAL?

Conditional Probability, Hypothesis Testing, and the Monty Hall Problem

Leonard F. Jacuzzo 316 W. Utica Buffalo, NY, (716)

Biblical Faith is Not "Blind It's Supported by Good Science!

LENT 2018 THEORY OF MEANING DR MAARTEN STEENHAGEN

Susan Vineberg. Ph.D. University of California, Berkeley, Logic and the Methodology of Science, 1992.

By submitting this essay, I attest that it is my own work, completed in accordance with University regulations. Minh Alexander Nguyen

THE TRUTH ABOUT TRUTH

Either God wants to abolish evil and cannot, or he can but does not want to, or he cannot and does not want to, or lastly he can and wants to.

PHIL 155: The Scientific Method, Part 1: Naïve Inductivism. January 14, 2013

Transcription:

Labs start this week Inquiry 1 proposal due in lab next week Class communication via Blackboard and/or webpage

Studying Biology: Start with a question. For example: How? Why? When? Where? Etc? How do we get answers? Strong Inference presents one method (article on webpage)

Cause of Peptic Ulcers: Overabundance of stomach acid due to Stress Anxiety Diet

Cause of Peptic Ulcers: Overabundance of stomach acid due to Stress Diet Anxiety Treatment: Antacids U.S. bought $4.4 billion in 1992 Tranquilizers

Dr. Barry Marshall

the bacteria H. pylori

H. pylori is the cause of 80% of peptic ulcers

The obvious or accepted answer was not the correct answer... How was Dr. Marshall able to get a correct answer? What parts of Strong Inference did he use?

The obvious or accepted answer was not the correct answer... Without alternative ideas, the answer would not have been found.

Without alternative ideas, the answer would not have been found. Propose multiple hypotheses. Now what?...

Strong Inference Knowledge is gained by eliminating incorrect ideas. Disproof is more reliable than proof.

Where does the matter come from for plants to grow? Matter can not normally be created or destroyed, only moved from one place to another.

Aristotle (~2,300 y.a.): Plants gain mass by taking it from the soil. Supporting Evidence: Plants need soil to grow. If roots are removed, plants die. After several years of cultivation, soil loses its ability to support plant growth.

Johann Baptista van Helmont did a simple experiment in the early 1600 s

What is the major difference between these two approaches to science? Aristotle (~2,300 y.a.): Plants gain mass by taking it from the soil Supporting Evidence: Plants need soil to grow. If roots are removed, plants die. After several years of cultivation, soil loses its ability to support plant growth. Johann Baptista van Helmont in 1600 s

The Rules of Strong Inference: Strong Inference is a method for looking at scientific problems by trying to disprove hypotheses and accepting the hypotheses that can not be disproved. Using Strong Inference entails following these rules (from an article by John Platt, 1964): What are the rules of Strong Inference?

The Rules of Strong Inference: Strong Inference is a method for looking at scientific problems by trying to disprove hypotheses and accepting the hypotheses that can not be disproved. Using Strong Inference entails following these rules (from an article by John Platt, 1964): 1. Devise multiple hypotheses.

The Rules of Strong Inference: Strong Inference is a method for looking at scientific problems by trying to disprove hypotheses and accepting the hypotheses that can not be disproved. Using Strong Inference entails following these rules (from an article by John Platt, 1964): 1. Devise multiple hypotheses. 2. Design experiment(s) to eliminate one or more of the hypotheses.

The Rules of Strong Inference: Strong Inference is a method for looking at scientific problems by trying to disprove hypotheses and accepting the hypotheses that can not be disproved. Using Strong Inference entails following these rules (from an article by John Platt, 1964): 1. Devise multiple hypotheses. 2. Design experiment(s) to eliminate one or more of the hypotheses. 3. Carry out the experiments to get reliable results.

What experimental errors might have been made? Johann Baptista van Helmont did a simple experiment in the early 1600 s

The Rules of Strong Inference: Strong Inference is a method for looking at scientific problems by trying to disprove hypotheses and accepting the hypotheses that can not be disproved. Using Strong Inference entails following these rules (from an article by John Platt, 1964): 1. Devise multiple hypotheses. 2. Design experiment(s) to eliminate one or more of the hypotheses. 3. Carry out the experiments to get reliable results. 4. Repeat. Refine hypotheses.

The Rules of Strong Inference: Strong Inference is a method for looking at scientific problems by trying to disprove hypotheses and accepting the hypotheses that can not be disproved. Using Strong Inference entails following these rules (from an article by John Platt, 1964): 1. Devise multiple hypotheses. 2. Design experiment(s) to eliminate one or more of the hypotheses. 3. Carry out the experiments to get reliable results. 4. Repeat. Refine hypotheses.

The Questions: Can your hypothesis be disproved? What experiment(s) can disprove your hypothesis?

The Rules of Strong Inference: Strong Inference is a method for looking at scientific problems by trying to disprove hypotheses and accepting the hypotheses that can not be disproved. Using Strong Inference entails following these rules (from an article by John Platt, 1964): 1. Devise multiple hypotheses. 2. Design experiment(s) to eliminate one or more of the hypotheses. 3. Carry out the experiments to get reliable results. 4. Repeat. Refine hypotheses.

Labs start this week Inquiry 1 proposal due in lab next week Class communication via Blackboard and/or webpage