Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Science and the Underdetermination of Theory by Evidence. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
A 5 page discussion of underdetermination and bridge theory. This paper explains qualitative verses quantatative research and induction vs. deduction in the framework of the scientific process. Bibliography lists 5 sources.
Page Count:
5 pages (~225 words per page)
File: AM2_PPsciUnderdetermination.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
theories that allow researchers to explain what otherwise would be the unexplainable. The statement that "the problem of underdetermination depends crucially on the ability to draw a sharp distinction
between those statements that are entirely about observable reality (observation statements) and those statements that make reference to unobservable entities and processes (theoretical statements and "bridge laws" is thus valid.
Grover Maxwell contends that no sharp distinction between observables and unobservables can be drawn in the formulation of theory. Thus,
the problem of underdetermination is not really a problem at all. Hanson, however, counters that undetermination is, in fact, a real problem, that in science in the strictest sense
of the word so-called "bridge laws" are not recognized. Strict science is about repeatability. If something cannot be repeated then it is not valid theory. Not all
of science, however, is based on this strict regime. The empiricist view of science, for example, is that knowledge is obtained through "sensory, experiential, or empirical interaction with the
world" (Wilson, 1999). Neither Maxwells or Hansons insight, however, eliminates the problem of underdetermination. The scientific process is characterized by
two separate yet integrated approaches. These approaches are that of qualitative and quantitative investigation. In the place of statistical findings revealed with quantitative research, qualitative research illuminates and
provides understanding (Hoepfl, 1997). Quantitative research reveals "causal determination, prediction and generalization and generalization of findings" (Hoepfl, 1997). Qualitative research allows extrapolation to similar situations (Hoepfl, 1997).
Qualitative research allows for a complexity and dynamic quality which is awkward using the hard and fast rules of quantitative evaluation (Hoepfl, 1997). Quantitative verses qualitative areas of areas
...