Science as a belief system

According to Popper, why has science been successful in explaining and controlling the world?

• Science is an open belief system — theories are open to scrutiny, criticism and testing.

• Governed by falsificationism — scientists try to disprove (falsify) theories.

• Knowledge is cumulative — it builds on previous discoveries (e.g. Newton building on earlier scientists).

• No theory is ever absolute truth — it can always be questioned or falsified (e.g. Copernicus disproving egocentrism).

How does Merton explain the rapid growth of science?

Merton’s Ethos of Science – CUDOS:

• C: Communism – Knowledge must be shared, not kept private.

• U:Universalism – All scientists are regarded as equal so it is their work that's challenged.

• D: Disinterestedness. Committed to truth & public findings honestly.

• OS: Organised Skepticism. Knowledge in science should be challenged & scrutinised.

How does science differ from religion as a belief system?

• Science is provisional — knowledge is open to challenge and can be falsified.

• Religion claims absolute, sacred truth based on divine authority.

• Religious knowledge cannot be challenged (heresy may be punished).

• Therefore, religious knowledge is fixed and does not grow, unlike science.

Horton (1973):

• Science = open belief system (claims can be tested and disproved).

• Religion, magic etc. = closed belief systems (claims cannot be overturned).

• Closed systems use “get-out clauses” to protect core beliefs when challenged.

• Example: Evans-Pritchard’s (1936) study of the Azande — witchcraft beliefs reinforce themselves rather than being disproved.

How does Pritchard’s study of the Azande show religion as a closed belief system?

• The Azande accept natural causes (e.g. snake bite) but reject coincidence — misfortune is explained by witchcraft.

• Accusations are tested by using a poison on a chicken called ‘the prince’s poison, benge’. If the chicken dies, the accused must apologise and promise to stop the witchcraft (often believed to be unconscious).

Social functions:

• Resolves conflict and prevents grudges.

• Encourages considerate behaviour.

• Acts as social control (witchcraft believed hereditary, so families regulate behaviour).

How do belief systems defend themselves against contradictory evidence according to Polanyi?

Belief systems protect themselves from challenge by reinforcing their own assumptions rather than accepting disproof.

Polanyi argues belief systems use three devices to sustain themselves:

• Circularity – Ideas are explained using other ideas within the same system (closed loop of reasoning).

• Subsidiary explanations – Failures are explained away (e.g. if an oracle fails, it was used incorrectly).

• Denial of legitimacy to rivals – Alternative belief systems are rejected outright (e.g. creationism dismisses evolution’s assumptions).

How do Kuhn and Polanyi challenge Popper’s view of science as open?

• Polanyi argues science, like all belief systems, rejects fundamental challenges.

• Example: Velikovsky (1950, Worlds in Collision) – Velikovsky argued that planetary collisions (plants crashing) caused historical disasters, but scientists dismissed his ideas because they contradicted established laws of physics and astronomy. H is theory was rejected without proper testing and scientists organised a boycott.

Kuhn’s paradigm theory

Kuhn argued that science operates within a paradigm which is a shared set of assumptions, methods, and beliefs about reality. Scientists are educated to accept this paradigm, so challenging it can lead to ridicule or exclusion. Scientific revolutions only happen when too many anomalies build up and confidence in the existing paradigm collapses, allowing new theories to replace the old one.

How do interpretivists explain scientific knowledge?

All knowledge, including science, is socially constructed that gain acceptance within the scientific community.

Knorr-Cetina

• Laboratory research is highly artificial and constructed (e.g. purified substances, specially bred animals).

How do Marxism, feminism, and postmodernism view scientific knowledge

Critical perspectives see science not as objective truth, but as socially and politically influenced knowledge.

• Marxism: Science serves the ruling class; knowledge often driven by capitalism’s needs (e.g. ballistics for weapon development).

• Feminism: Science serves men’s interests, e.g. biological ideas used to justify male domination.

• Science as ideology: Advances in “pure” science often support dominant social groups or economic power.

• Postmodernism (Lyotard, 1984):

  • Science is a meta-narrative claiming universal truth.

  • In reality, it is just one discourse used to dominate people.

  • Science has become technoscience, serving capitalist interests by producing commodities for profit.