D. R. Oldroyd

Overview:
Science has a history, and a philosophy. From philosophical origins of logic, categorization, and abstract mathematical language, to systematic methodological experimentation. Those who would attempt to improve an understanding, utilized scientific tools and ideas, but they also came across their limitations. Knowing epistemology, knowing how knowledge is acquired, means knowing the relationships between the ideas and nature of reality. Knowing the history of philosophy and methodology of science means becoming a better judge of how scientific inquiry is carried out and how scientists think about their investigations.

Knowing the limitations of science means being able to find ways to potentially overcome the limitations. Limitations such as the deceptive ways of how information is acquired, the problem of induction, the scientists’ prior ideas, the social interaction of the ideas, and that all knowledge is subject to doubt. This is a book about the individuals who developed the scientific foundations. Developed when trying to apply prior concepts to obtain an understanding.

Philosophy and Science:
Within the ancient tradition, abstract math was meant to train the mind. An understanding of abstract math that would result in the production of practice knowledge. Even during this era there was a distinction between practical and theoretical knowledge, but with a different meaning. The free individual would consider the theoretic aspects of a problem, while the slave would be doing the practical aspect of measurements.

Science depends on logical statements, on syllogistic logic. Which is concerned with forms of arguments, the validity of an argument. Syllogistic logic is not concerned with whether the premises and conclusions are true or false.

Science depends on induction, but induction is a logically invalid method. Induction is how general claims are made from particular knowledge. Deductive method is an application of general statements to the particular claims. Deduction required testing the claims. With new science philosophy seeking knowledge through experimentation. Trying to falsify the theories made. A scientific philosophy of positivism even claims to be able to separate facts and values. That values could be kept out of science. As more empirical claims are made, the claims require less empirical evidence and become true by convention.

Caveats?
This book is very difficult to read. Frequently focusing on the technical science, the ideas produced, rather than the method and process of science. Although the book is meant to be an introduction to epistemology, the book is more valuable to those who already have an understanding of epistemology, and have background information on the various philosophers and scientists discussed. For those with an interest in epistemology, the book can be a source reference.

The philosopher and scientist represented are primarily European, and American. This is problematic because much of science was developed elsewhere, such as the Middle-East.… (plus d'informations)

31. Thinking about the Earth : A History of Ideas in Geology by David R. Oldroyd
published: 1996
format: 348 page hardcover (entire book with glossary, bibliography, index, etc is 440 pages)
acquired: 1996
read: May 1-28
rating: 4

The book for those who were wondering what a geosyncline is or was, or a miogeosyncline, or eugeosyncline, and for those wondering what the heck a Wernerian was, or what the big deal was between uniformitarianism and catastrophism. Geology, for all that it goes back to mythology, is a surprisingly young science, and not always well-given to empirical research. You collect data and then make a story. So Descartes could send out crazy ideas, and they remained influential for years, while Leibniz could write up some very creative ideas, and see them disappear and never get published until the 20th century. Because who knew what was true, and maybe the earth really had an outer crustal layer lying on a molten ocean of convection. Hooke threw projectiles at plaster balls to try to determine whether the moon's craters were impact craters or volcanoes. Someone else tried to cook limestone to see if he could generate marble. Unknowns make fascinating people.

Of course James Hutton was giving us deep time in 18th century, but Lyell wasn't providing plainly reasonable observations until the the 19th century, and he never bought into ice ages, despite the evidence all around him, covering and confusing all the other geology. Darwin waited till mid century. It's kind of amazing that geologic maps didn't exist until the 19th century, and the real intense mapping didn't get under way until well into that century (many areas weren't mapped at all until the 20th century). That plate tectonics, an earth science fundamental, wasn't worked out in any sensible and defensible way until the 1960's. Ideas that appear crazy to us today aren't very old, leaving one to wonder how fundamentally sound earth and geologic concepts are today.

The writing was maybe rough, the geological terms not exactly user friendly, but Oldroyd has put together quite a story, covering the history of science from the geologic perspective. Lovers of geology and this obscure history of science will really enjoy this. Thanks to Kevin (aka stretch) for pointing me here.

2018
https://www.librarything.com/topic/288371#6494072… (plus d'informations)