Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM

Copy

Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.

DeleteCancel

THE NATURAL SCIENCES

No description
by

Daniel Santella

on 10 March 2016

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of THE NATURAL SCIENCES

THE SCIENCES
'What is it about theories in the human sciences and natural sciences that makes them convincing?'
Make a 2-3 video Public Service Announcement highlighting the answer to this question
The focus of the video should be on the
methodology
of the sciences and the
achievements
of the sciences
Groups of 4-5
'What is it about theories in the human sciences and natural sciences that makes them convincing?'
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION?
EVIDENCE/JUSTIFICATIONS?
TERMS TO DEFINE?
PERSPECTIVES?
THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD
EXPERIMENTS
Controllable
Measurable
Repeatable
RELATED WOKS?
REASON
PERCEPTION
LANGUAGE
EMOTION
FAITH
INTUITION
IMAGINATION
MEMORY
TERMS
RULE
LAW
THEORY
INDUCTIVISM
HYPOTHESIS
OBSERVATION
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE
DEPENDENT VARIABLE
KARL POPPER
HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT
NATURAL SCIENCES FRAMEWORK
DO YOU TRUST SCIENCE?
How much trust do you have in science?
A. None at all
B. A little
C. A good amount
D. A great deal
PSEUDO SCIENCE
Why do many conservatives distrust science?
Read the articles on the Weebly under the title "Science Haters" and reflect on this topic in your journal.
BEN GOLDACRE
CLIMATE DENIER PRESENTATION
NATURAL SCIENCES VOCABULARY
SAMPLE TOK SCIENCES QUESTIONS
Acupuncture
Astrology
Phrenology
Homeopathy
Creationism
Chrystology
Feng Shui
-claims to be scientific, yet in fact is not
-often makes vague, unsubstantiated claims
"Santellium tablets will restore the balance & energy to your life"
-prone to ad hoc exceptions
Investigate one of the fields above and decide to what extent they are a pseudoscience.
Form groups of three and invent your own pseudoscience (like detox, brain gym, etc). You should include a detailed description of what your "science" claims to do. Be sure to include claims that are vague, based on flawed studies, made up, and/or scientifically untestable. Create an a4 poster (by hand or on the computer) or one minute video advertising your pseudoscience.
Break into Groups of Three
Presentation Tasks:
Describe Detox, Brain Gym, or The Progenium XY Complex
Explain WHY Ben Goldacre thinks they are BAD SCIENCE. Where appropriate, point to specific aspects from the "Spotting Bad Science" document.
Briefly explore the topic in relation to a way of knowing.
Briefly explore the implications/significance of the real life situation. Why does in matter that some things are presented as science but do not meet the criteria of science?

A FAIR TRIAL?
How can we tell if a scientific claim is valid and reliable?
Validity
: Does the experiment measure what the scientist says it measures? Is the experiment constructed properly?
Reliability
: Can the experiment be repeated many times to get the same result?
Random samples
Double Blind Trials with Control Groups
This is done to eliminate
confirmation bias
,
conscious deception
, the
placebo effect
, and the
nocebo effect
HW: Read the chapter on the Placebo Effect from
Bad Science
and the articles on scientists behaving badly
HOROSCOPES
ETHICS and the SCIENCES
Empiricism-Thomas Kuhn-Karl Popper- Falsification- Confirmation Bias- Observer Effect- Pseudoscience- Paradigm Shift- Hypothesis- Law- Rule- Placebo Effect- Measurable- Controllable- Repeatable- Inductivism- Expert Seeing- Principle of Simplicity- Selectivity- Conjectures- Refutations- Normal Science- Scientific Revolutions- Double Blind Study- Control Group- Scientism- Science Worship- Relativism- Correlation- Causation- Sample Size- Validity- Reliability- Conflict of Interest- Underdetermination- Background Assumptions- Selectivity-
HW: Read these articles!
What is acceptable conduct in the sciences?
Do ethical judgements limit the discovery of scientific knowledge?
If so, should they?
The articles below, all linked on the course weebly, will help you explore these issues.
Look up your horoscope on the internet and determine how accurate it is. In what ways could it be considered scientific? In what ways should you doubt its scientificosity (not a word)?
Instructions
Each of you has been given a set of graphic interpretations put forward by six different scientists concerning the growth of scientific knowledge.

1. Carefully study each of the interpretations given by the scientists.

2. Discuss these different interpretations with your group and select the one that you find appropriate. If you find that none of the six ideas is appropriate, and you would like to present another idea, then clearly illustrate or define your interpretation.

3. Make a brief note of the argument in support of your selection. List at least one reason for each of the other interpretations as to why it has been rejected. Do not hesitate to use support examples from your own experience of science or from your study of science in the Diploma Program.

4 Select a group leader who can communicate your selection and rationale to the rest of the class.

In approximately 20 minutes we will reassemble to discuss results from each of the different groups.
THE GROWTH OF SCIENTIFIC
KNOWLEDGE.
LINEAR
STEADY
PROGRESS
CURVILINEAR
MORE PROGRESS AT BEGINNING
LESS PROGRESS NOW
CURVILINEAR
LESS PROGRESS AT BEGINNING
MORE PROGRESS NOW
Piece wise linear
TAKES INTO ACCOUNT
MAJOR DISCOVERIES
Piece wise linear
Step up-Drop Off
MAJOR DISCOVERIES LEAD TO OTHER INFO BEING FALSIFIED
NEW KNOWLEDGE JUST LEADS TO FURTHER QUESTIONS
REVERSE CURVILINEAR
ASSESSMENT
Pick a real life situation related to the natural sciences and create three possible knowledge questions from it. Choose your favorite and give a two to three minute video presentation that explores it.
THE VACCINE WAR
Watch the video at pbs.org
Take notes while watching about issues related to TOK: Which WOKs are most relevant? How is each side constructing knowledge? Think about evidence, validity of arguments, justifications, assumptions, culture, technology. Which AOKs are involved?
Which side do you agree with in the Vaccine War? Why do you feel the way you do? How do you know?
In groups, come up with four solid Knowledge Questions related to this real life situation.
Examine the differing perspectives and how they are formed.
Examine the assumptions in knowledge claims.
Explore the implications of the KQ.
Critically analyze evidence for knowledge claims.
Use TOK theories/ideas to explore the issues.
Compare and contrast/discuss the role of WOKs.
Examine how this situation relates to your own ideas about knowledge.
Critically analyze and evaluate your own opinion.
THINGS TO CONSIDER DOING:
Good Science Resources
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/science/
http://www.iflscience.com/
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science.html
http://www.salon.com/topic/science/
http://www.realclearscience.com/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/0/
www.nature.com
www.wired.com
www.newscientist.com
http://www.popsci.com/
PRACTICE
Work in groups of two to develop this KQ. How might you do each of the tasks?
The links below will give you a plethora of RLSs to potentially use in any TOK science assessment
What is the role of reason and emotion in determining our beliefs in science?
How do we know if vaccines cause autism?
RECOGNIZED KQ
DEVELOPED KQ
Examine the differing perspectives and how they are formed.
Examine the assumptions in knowledge claims.
Explore the implications of the KQ.
Critically analyze evidence for knowledge claims.
Use TOK theories/ideas to explore the issues.
Compare and contrast/discuss the role of WOKs.
Examine how this situation relates to your own ideas about knowledge.
Critically analyze and evaluate your own opinion.
IMPLICATIONS OF THE VACCINE DEBATE
Wrote
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
(1962) and argued that science did not evolve as a steady accumulation of knowledge.
He believed periods of "normal science" lay between periods of "revolutionary science".
This revolutionary science challenged the prevailing paradigm successfully in order to create a new paradigm, or way of viewing the world.
Stated that these shifts were often illogical and irrational, angering some in the scientific community.
During periods of normal science, anomalies that could not be explained by the existing theories accumulate, until a new theory emerges to explain them. This is the revolutionary science.
THOMAS KUHN:
PARADIGM SHIFTS
What is the next Paradigm Shift?
OLD VIEW
KUHN'S VIEW
"In the natural sciences progress can be made, but in the arts this is not possible.” To what extent do you agree?
Ethical judgements limit the methods available in the production of knowledge in both the arts and the natural sciences. Discuss.
“That which is accepted as knowledge today is sometimes discarded tomorrow.” Consider knowledge issues raised by this statement in two areas of knowledge.
In what ways may disagreement aid the pursuit of knowledge in the natural and human sciences?
'What is it about theories in the human sciences and natural sciences that makes them convincing?'
The natural and human sciences provide the most accurate view of reality. Evaluate this claim with reference to at least one other area of knowledge.
There is little that does not fall within the paradigm of science; as a method of attaining knowledge it is our most powerful. To what extent do you agree with this claim?
Discuss the ways in which notions of reliability and validity differ in the natural science and the arts.
To what extent are the social sciences science? Discuss.
Flaws of the Scientific Method*
COME UP WITH A KNOWLEDGE QUESTION FOR THE ABOVE CLIP
HUMAN SCIENCES FRAMEWORK
HUMAN SCIENCES ASSIGNMENT
In groups of 3, work together to devise an experiment that will tell us something about humans: how they live, how their mind works, how they interact, how their systems work.
Your group will present your findings to the class and report the validity and reliability of your results.
OBSERVATION
Selectivity
Expectations
Expert Seeing
Observer Effect
HYPOTHESIS
Confirmation Bias
Background Assumptions
Underdetermination
LAW
Problem of Induction
*van de Lagemaat
The law of good science is that you can’t say “I’ve got an idea and I’m going to fall in love with it and selectively cite evidence to support it.”

You’re only being a good scientist,” Katz said, “if you say, ‘I’m going to try to read the literature in as unbiased a manner as I possibly can, see where it leads me, and then offer the advice that I have based on that view from an altitude.’

I also find it sad that because his book is filled with a whole bunch of nonsense, that’s why it’s a bestseller; that’s why we’re talking. Because that’s how you get on the bestseller list. You promise the moon and stars, you say everything you heard before was wrong, and you blame everything on one thing. You get a scapegoat; it’s classic. Atkins made a fortune with that formula. We’ve got Rob Lustig saying it’s all fructose; we’ve got T. Colin Campbell [author of The China Study, a formerly bestselling book] saying it’s all animal food; we now have Perlmutter saying it’s all grain. There’s either a scapegoat or a silver bullet in almost every bestselling diet book.”

The recurring formula is apparent: Tell readers it’s not their fault. Blame an agency; typically the pharmaceutical industry or U.S. government, but also possibly the medical establishment. Alluding to the conspiracy vaguely will suffice. Offer a simple solution. Cite science and mainstream research when applicable; demonize it when it is not.
Use your TOK journal to reflect on the presentation by Jim Briggs. Questions to consider:
To what extent did you find his presentation convincing? Explain.
Should we listen to all opinions on a topic?
Are all opinions equal on a topic? Why or why not? Use examples.
Is it responsible for the school to bring in people with fringe opinions on topics like this?
How does Jim Briggs know what he knows about Global Warming? Consider the WOKs.
How do you know what you know about Global Warming? Consider the WOKs.
LAST WEEK TONIGHT with JOHN OLIVER
Watch the clip and consider the following questions:
What is Oliver's view on the "debate"? How does he convey this? Is it effective? Why or why not?
How do Oliver and Briggs differ on their view of the media in framing people's views on Climate Change?
How do you think the media shapes people's views on topics such as Global Warming?
Do you think there is objective truth on this, or any topic? Or is it just someone's beliefs?
CLIMATE CHANGE
Words have meaning. Certain words are more emotive than others. Certain words imply certain things about a topic, a group of people or an event. Think "terrorist" and "freedom fighter", two words that could be applied to the same person depending on the context.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/17/science/earth/in-climate-change-whats-in-a-name.html?_r=0
Deconstructing a Real Life Situation & Extracting a Knowledge Question
Which Ways of Knowing are involved in this RLS?
Which Areas of Knowledge are involved in this RLS?
Which TOK concepts are involved?
Reliability? Validity? Evidence? Certainty? Belief? Culture? Truth? Technology? Authority?
VICE NEWS: KILLING CANCER
Naomi Oreskes:
Why we should trust scientists
THE POWERS OF SCIENCE
http://www.hbo.com/vice/episodes/03/00-vice-special-report-killing-cancer/video/killing-cancer-full-episode.html#/
Paradigm Shift in Cancer Treatment
Science Under Attack
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-is-pseudoscience/
Read the article on labels in the issue of Climate Change.
What questions, if any, do you have about the content of article?
What labels are used by each side in this debate?
Are these words important? If so, why?
Why have they chosen these words?
What is their potential impact on the knowledge we have?
What are the implications for the larger society?
Reflect in your journal for Homework.

REAL LIFE SITUATION
GLOBAL WARMING
Real Life Situations (RLSs) are always better when they are SPECIFIC events or things, not general concepts or categories
GLOBAL WARMING DEBATE
AN ARTICLE/SHOW ON GLOBAL WARMING
ARTICLE "VERBAL WARMING" ON LABELS IN THE GLOBAL WARMING DEBATE
ARTICLE "VERBAL WARMING" ON LABELS IN THE GLOBAL WARMING DEBATE WITH "THE" AS THE FIFTH WORD OF THE SEVENTH PARAGRAPH.
JOHN OLIVER'S SEGMENT LOOKING AT HOW GLOBAL WARMING IS PORTRAYED IN THE MEDIA.
Come up with two possible knowledge questions related to the article
Full transcript