Chapter 1 - Methodolgy

Methodology is the systematic assessment and justification of method choice. It asks questions like:

• What relevant methods do we have available to reach a scientific goal?

• What reasons speak for or against choosing any of these alternatives?

• How should one weigh these reasons to form an overall decision?

1) It renders scientists less flexile in finding alternative viewpoints that could support criticism of their own discipline or group.

• I the use of a method contributes to an error in the research result, then it is much harder for a group that uses this method by convention to discover this mistake than for a group that does not follow the conventional method.

2) It makes interdisciplinary work hard.

• If two disciplines have different conventions about what methods to use, then bringing these disciplines together is like letting people drive on the right and left on the same street - that inevitably leads to mayhem, as long as people have no other reason for their choice than “but we’ve always done it that way!”. To be able to collaborate with people from different disciplines, who follow different conventions, one must go beyond conventional methodology and instead make transparent the underlying justification for choosing one’s method, which is understandable to people from various disciplines and perhaps even convinces them.

The difference is that the best result view of methodology remained unclear of what goals it supports, while the epistemic tool account makes scientific goals specific, and it focuses on the reasons one has for choosing a method, before implementing it.

Prediction:

• Prediciting that the comet XY will be closest to Earth on Thursday at 10 am, according to its trajectory and speed.

Explanation:

• Global warming is caused by GHG emissions.

Design:

• Designing a drug that enhances students’ focus by targeting XY in the brain.

True, justified belief.

If I let the glass fall, then the glass breaks.

If I lose the key to my dorm room, I cannot unlock the door.

If I study for an exam, then the chances to pass increase.

The person considers that the proposition is true.

Your mother asks you what you want for Christmas. You say only one thing that you really want. In this case, you believe that your mother will get you the gift you asked for because it's the only thing you asked for, but you're still uncertain because it might be sold out or she might choose something else. This shows how you can have a belief and still have some uncertainty about the outcome.

No, in order for Eric to be justified in his belief he must be able to put forward evidence or some other reasons (justifiers)

For something to qualify as knowledge, it's important that the belief is not only justified, but also true. A belief can be justified on the basis of available evidence and still be false, as historical examples such as the geocentric model of the universe show. Astronomers once believed with justification that the Earth was the center of the universe, but their belief was ultimately false. This example illustrates that while justified belief is necessary, it alone does not make something knowledge. Truth is essential because knowledge must reflect how things really are, not just what we believe or think is right at the time.