Try to describe the
role of scientific experiments and their relativity.
(1)
The basic functions of scientific experiments are as follows: 1. To provide some factual material to strengthen or refute a
hypothesis.2. Provide fresh factual material that forms the empirical basis for
new hypotheses or theories.
(2)
The relativity of scientific experiments.
(3)
We should not idolize any specific experimental results. Any experiment is
individual and should be extrapolated. The relativity of the
experiment itself. Experimental results are bound to be limited by
technical and intellectual conditions.
How to
correctly interpret the constants in measurement.
1.
Constants in measurement are the reflection of human beings to the objective
world, rather than the visual image of the object. The real world is not made
up of numbers. It is made up of matter of different shapes and sizes.
Quantitative relations are an alternative way for human understanding the
interrelationships of topological structures in the real world.
2.
The selection and determination of invariable parameters are the direct
prerequisites for observation and experiment.
On the
Role and Philosophical Significance of Measurement.
(1) the role of measurement.
1.
Measurement links theory and practice,
empirical knowledge and mathematical expression.
2.
Measurement provides the necessary conditions
for the application of mathematical concepts and techniques to the study of
nature.
3.
Measurement refines the scientific structure.
4.
Measurement has a description with
simplicity, accuracy, universality and invariance.
(2) the philosophical significance of measurement.
1.
Measurement depends on measurement technology.
2.
The major challenge of measurement to epistemology. Measurement can not be separated from material means, so there is
interference to the measured object. Especially at the atomic scale, there
exists some absolute interference, which has become an important philosophical
problem with the development of quantum mechanics and the proposal of
uncertainty relation.
On the
characteristics of scientific experiments.
1.
Simplify, purify and intensify natural processes. In order to
study it under artificial conditions.
2.
Implement the principle of modeling in various forms.
3.
It must be repeatable. Reproducibility reflects that the experimental process
is an objective material process in essence, which guarantees the objectivity
and reality of the experiment, and is the basic requirement of the experiment.
How is the new
empirical law derived from the theoretical law.
1.
Theoretical law uses conceptual theoretical words, while empirical law contains
only observable words. The former cannot be deduced directly from the latter.
For example, the theoretical term "molecular kinetic energy", which
is unobserved, is linked to the observable "temperature". This
presents a set of rules that connect theoretical words with observable words.
This is called the correspondence rule.
2.
Use corresponding rules to transform theoretical words into observable words
and derive empirical rules, which are characterized by:
(1)
This explanation is incomplete and open.
(2)
It will not be completed at one time and has no terminality.
On several
basic characteristics of the theoretical law.
1.
Theoretical laws are generally expressed as abstract language, with the help of
concepts created by some scientists to express laws.
2.
The terms of theoretical laws do not refer to observable things. In other
words, the contents expressed by theoretical laws cannot be measured in a
simple and direct way.
3.
Theoretical law is not a direct generalization and summary of observed
phenomena. Namely, the source of theoretical law and empirical law is
fundamentally different.
4.
Theoretical laws have prophetic power, which can explain existing empirical
laws and derive new ones.
On the relationship
between tradition and innovation in scientific discovery.
Tradition and innovation are two
complementary aspects of scientific discovery.
Conventional research is a kind of
thinking activity that follows tradition and is highly convergent. This kind of
research is always carried out within the scope of scientific tradition, trying
to adjust existing theories or existing observations to make them more and more
consistent.
Scientific revolutions are relatively
rare. Moreover, the continuous phase of the collected research is the necessary
preparation for the revolutionary transformation.
Only when scientific research is
firmly rooted in the contemporary scientific tradition can it break the old
tradition and make innovations. Existing traditions give meaning to puzzles,
and solutions to puzzles suggest new traditions.
Why say there is no
gap between discovery and defense.
1.
In practice, discovery is not merely a
psychological event, but at least part of it is a defense, or should be
included in the defense.
2.
Probability precedes acceptability. Good
reason in favour of probability will certainly favour acceptability.
3.
There is no gap between discovery and
justification, and they are getting closer. Probability and acceptability are analysisable, except for the initial speculations, which
are still beyond scientific logic. What supports probable discovery is also a
defense of probability, and therefore all true discovery
is a defense.
Try to describe the
historical evolution of the relationship between science and philosophy.
I.
Historical evolution
1.
In ancient times, natural philosophy was both the philosophy and the science of
its time.
2.
After the modern scientific revolution, positive science became independent
from natural philosophy and became the leading role of human knowledge, and
finally formed a discipline different from philosophy.
3.
At the end of the 19th century, Mach proposed the "empirical criterion of
meaning", aiming to separate science from metaphysics. At the beginning of
the 20th century, there appeared a trend of thought that separated science from
philosophy, positive evidence from philosophical speculation.
4.
The division between science and philosophy is the mainstream of modern times,
and the scientization permeates all fields of human
knowledge.
II.
Currently, there are roughly three positions on the relationship between
science and philosophy: One is that there is still a unique method in
philosophy which is different from that in science; Second, philosophy should
also be "scientific" and become "meta-science" or
"thinking science"; The third is to make philosophy bear modern
problems and become philosophy in its original sense.
