Avoiding Circularity in Assessing Objectivity of FSRC
Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2024 5:01 am
Since this point is raised frequently, here is a separate thread to address the issue;
Here is the mature view [from AI {wR}] to the above problem;Peter Holmes wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2024 9:46 am I don't misunderstand your argument. It's just fallacious. Your FSRC theory provides no basis for assessing the credibility, reliability or objectivity of a practice and discourse that produces knowledge - and so for comparing discourses - because your first premise is that all knowledge is within an FSRC.
And this is circular, because whatever FSRC 'produces' the knowledge that an FSRC is credible, reliable, etc - can't be self-authenticating or self-authorising. There is no 'master' FSRC above the fray of competing FSRCs - no way to show that astronomy is 'gold standard' and astrology is cack.
AI wrote:Escaping Circularity:
Here are approaches to avoid circularity:
Non-Circular Foundation: Introduce a meta-framework (outside any specific FSK) that establishes basic principles for evaluating FSKs. This meta-framework could include things like:
Break the Circle; Escape Clause: Your proposed escape clause of making "knowledge of the credibility of FSKs" an exception is a reasonable approach. This acknowledges a meta-level knowledge that sits outside the specific FSK being used. This exemption acknowledges that evaluating frameworks themselves requires a different kind of knowledge, one that is more metacognitive (thinking about thinking). This metacognitive knowledge could be based on principles of logic, consistency, evidence-based reasoning, and broad societal acceptance.
- Internal consistency: The FSK doesn't lead to contradictions within itself.
Explanatory power: The FSK explains a wide range of phenomena.
Predictive ability: The FSK allows for predictions that can be tested.
Openness to revision: The FSK allows for new evidence to change its structure.
Bootstrapping: You can think of establishing the credibility of scientific FSK as a bootstrapping process. Initially, we might rely on simpler frameworks or common-sense observations to evaluate different FSKs. These simpler frameworks might not be perfect, but they can provide a starting point. As we build scientific knowledge, we can refine our criteria for judging FSKs based on evidence, consistency, predictive power, etc.
Convergence: Scientific progress often involves convergence of evidence from multiple frameworks. While individual FSKs might have limitations, the convergence of results across different approaches strengthens the overall credibility and objectivity of the scientific FSK.
Levels of Analysis: Another way to escape circularity is to consider levels of analysis. You could argue that basic observation and logic can provide some foundational knowledge (e.g., "the sky is blue") that serves as a starting point for building FSKs. This basic knowledge wouldn't rely on a specific FSK itself.
Here's a revised approach:
Start with a Basic Framework: Begin with a simple, common-sense framework to evaluate different FSKs.
Scientific FSK Emerges: Through observation, experimentation, and refinement, a scientific FSK emerges that demonstrates its effectiveness in explaining and predicting phenomena.
Credibility Through Convergence: The scientific FSK gains further credibility when its results converge with evidence from other independent frameworks.
This approach avoids circularity by acknowledging a starting point outside the specific FSKs and then building credibility through a cumulative process.
Additionally:
Be transparent about the limitations of any FSK, including the scientific one. No framework is perfect, but some are demonstrably better than others at explaining specific phenomena.
Classical Logic Limitations:
Classical logic may not be the best tool for this situation. FSKs are complex systems, and classical logic struggles with fuzzy boundaries and nuanced relationships. Consider exploring:
Fuzzy Logic: Allows for degrees of truth, more accurately reflecting the complexities of FSK evaluation.
Epistemology: The branch of philosophy dealing with knowledge and its justification, which goes beyond the formal rules of classical logic.