Lakatos and MacIntyre on Incommensurability and the Rationality of Theory-change
ABSTRACT: Imre Lakatos' "methodology of scientific research programs" and Alasdair MacIntyre's "tradition-constituted enquiry" are two sustained attempts to overcome the assumptions of logical empiricism, while saving the appearance that theory-change is rational. The key difference between them is their antithetical stand on the issue of incommensurability between large-scale theories. This divergence generates other areas of disagreement; the most important are the relevance of the historical record and the presence of decision criteria that are common to rival programs. I show that Lakatos' rejection of the incommensurability thesis and dismissal of actual history are motivated by the belief that neither are compatible with the rationality of theory-change. If MacIntyre can deny the necessity of dispensing with the historical record, and show that incommensurability and the consequent absence of shared decision criteria are compatible with rationality in theory-change, then Lakatos' argument will lose its force, and MacIntyre will better honor the intention to take seriously the historicality of science. I argue that MacIntyre can dissolve tensions between incommensurability and rationality in theory-change if he is able, first, to distinguish a sense of the incommensurability thesis that preserves genuine rivalry between theories, and second, to show that the possibility of rationality in theory-change depends not on the presence of common decision criteria, but on the fact that traditions can fail by their own standards. After reconstructing and examining the argument, I conclude that the notion of a tradition's "internal failure" is coherent, but that it leaves crucial questions about the epistemology and ontology of traditions that must be answered if MacIntyre's proposal is to constitute a genuine improvement on Lakatos.
Although he is not primarily a philosopher of science, Alasdair MacIntyre has drawn on post-Kuhnian methodological reflection in his formulation of an historicist theory of knowledge (1984a: 271) or what his more recent work terms tradition-constituted inquiry (1988: 354). In many respects, MacIntyres traditions are similar to the research programs described in the work of Imre Lakatos (1977). Both thinkers propose a shift in focus from atomic propositions to some type of holism by making an entire theory, or series of theories, the proper object of evaluation. Each argues that the issues investigated by participants in research traditions are not timeless questions, but are crucially shaped by their own problematics. Without devaluing consistency and logical rigor, each supposes that incoherence of a certain sort is the motor of intellectual progress.
Modern scientific trends developed from philosophies of the past, they are part of the philosophical path that a philosopher must walk when undergoing self-reflection. They are a presentation of modern-day prejudices, which the philosopher must seek to understand and overcome
The essay starts off by stating, “One could say that the dominant scientific world-view going into the 16th century was not all that “scientific” in the modern sense of the
The Crowning of Flora. 1816. Give Me Liberty!: An American History. Brief Third ed. Vol. One. New York: W.W. Norton, 2012. 274. Print.
How we approach the question of knowledge is pivotal. If the definition of knowledge is a necessary truth, then we should aim for a real definition for theoretical and practical knowledge. Methodology examines the purpose for the definition and how we arrived to it. The reader is now aware of the various ways to dissect what knowledge is. This entails the possibility of knowledge being a set of truths; from which it follows that one cannot possibly give a single definition. The definition given must therefore satisfy certain desiderata , while being strong enough to demonstrate clarity without losing the reader. If we base our definition on every counter-example that disproves our original definition then it becomes ad hoc. This is the case for our current defini...
The Revolution was a prominent point of change in the lives of early Americans. It provided new freedoms and opportunities with a challenge for the colonists to design a new government for themselves. At the same time it reduced the freedom of the Indians and made little progress for both women and slaves. The Revolutionary war was revolutionary and whether for better or worse it brought about a dramatic change in the lives of those involved. When we know both the positive and negative that came from this war we can fully appreciate this point in our history.
Consequently I propose an empiricism approach to science. Empiricism takes empirical adequacy (not truth) as the goal of science and when it accepts a theory it accepts it as empirically adequate.
Moore, Brooke Noel., and Kenneth Bruder. "Chapter 6- The Rise of Metaphysics and Epistemology; Chapter 9- The Pragmatic and Analytic Traditions; Chapter 7- The Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries." Philosophy: the Power of Ideas. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, 2011. Print.
Having attained all that he desires from the knowledge of man, Marlowe’s character Faustus turns to the only remaining school of thought that he feels he must master which is the art of necromancy. In his pursuits, he manages to summon the devil Mephistopheles, arch demon of hell, and strikes a deal to trade his immortal soul with Lucifer in exchange for being granted an infinite amount of power and knowledge that extends even beyond the limits of human understanding. However in the process of negotiating the terms of his pact, it becomes clear that Faust is in a constant state of uncertainty in terms of whether he should repent and forsake the arrangement or simply go through with it. This underlying theme of internal struggle is introduced very early and reappears in later acts with the appearance of established binaries that suggest a theme of division not only among the character of John Faustus, but within the written text as a whole. This suggests that Faustus is meant to serve as a symbol for the divided nature of man and the consequences of failing to negotiate the struggles that are a result of the divided self.
In Dr. Faustus, Christopher Marlowe demonstrates how temptation can drag us down into a world of darkness and consequence. He creates a tragic epic based off of a legend in Western culture. He uses allegorical characters to create a morality play and present moral lessons to his audiences, typically of Christian nature. The story of Faustus is based on an actual magician in the fifteenth century who lived in an area of northern Germany. In the play, the common scholarly forms of authority did not please Dr. Faustus. He believed he was too superior to remain in this realm of knowledge and wanted to reach much further than what he was already exposed to. Due to the strong desire to escape humanity and enter a world far beyond reality, Faustus was drawn into Lucifer’s deception. This causes him to turn away from morality and sin against God.
Robinson, R. R. (1994). Some methodological approaches to the unexplained points. Philosophy 2B/3B (pp. 27-34). Melbourne: La Trobe University.
Christopher Marlowe’s 14th century play “The Tragical History of the Life and Death of Doctor Faustus” demonstrates not how the Devil can lead mankind to temptation, but how mankind through free-will can ultimately lead itself to suffering through sin. I believe that Marlowe heavily uses Christian doctrine through the actions of John Faustus in order to criticize those who do not partake in or see the seriousness of religion.
Doctor Faustus, also referred to as The Tragical History of the Life and Death of Doctor Faustus is a play by Christopher Marlowe. This play is based on a German story where a man sells his soul to the devil in quest for knowledge and power (Sales 340. The protagonist in this play is Doctor Faustus. Doctor Faustus was hungry of power and knowledge and in search for them; he sold his soul to the devil. At first, he was very happy with the praise he received from the people as they considered him a hero. Later on, Faustus learns that he committed a grave mistake of selling his soul to the devil for twenty-four years. Even though he felt remorseful for his mistakes, it was already late for him. He is later found by his fellow scholars dead and torn from limb to limb. Faustus was a heroic fool who only thought of power and never thought of eternal damnation.
Another allegory shown in the story is when Faustus is approached by the good angel and the bad angel. The good angel represents the medieval world by telling Faustus to stay away from magic and focus on God: “Sweet Faustus, think of heaven and heavenly things” (5.20). On the other hand, the bad angel represents the Renaissance world by urging Faustus to remain committed to his plan: “No, Faustus; think of honor and of wealth” (5.21) The text displays the battle between what Faustus is expected to live by and what he wants to live by.
Dr. Faustus, written by Christopher, is the story of a man that represents the common human dissatisfaction with being human. He sells his soul to the devil for what he believes to be limitless power, with full logical knowledge as to the consequences of such a transaction. He knows the stakes of his gamble with the devil. His extensive education and his cultural environment had certainly alerted him as to the dangers associated with Lucifer. Although aware of the consequences of such a pact, he is blinded by three things that bring about his ultimate demise. His greed to know all, his pride that made him believe he was better than man, and his denial that in the end he would bring his own downfall upon himself. If Faustus had not been these things he would not have brought an end to himself.
Warren D. Smith. “The Nature of Evil in “Doctor Faustus.” The Modern Language Review 60.2 (Apr. 1965): 171-175. Modern Humanities Research Association. Web. 15 Nov. 2013.