PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE: METHODS, AND NEW TRENDS

GST104
FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OYE EKITI

Introduction

Philosophy of science is an interesting course for all students because, it is the area that keeps young
researchers abreast as regards the various emerging methods of conducting research in almost all field of
human knowledge. Arguably, science could be said to have hold unmatched research methodology.
Exposing various scientific methods to upcoming researchers will not only help them in the course of
meeting daily challenges of academic life but will equally go a long way to alert them the danger
inherent in unmitigated scientific inquiry that could endanger humanity. In this wise, normative
philosophy becomes invaluable tool to preserve humanity and human pristine value system under
constant erosion by science and technology. This chapter aims at exposing students to various available
research tools to complete requirements for an undergraduate degree programme.

1.Philosophy of Science

Philosophy deals with all fields of human knowledge be it Science, Politics, History, Medicine,
Psychology, Sociology, Astrology, Geometrics, Mathematics, Logic, Language, Morality, Education,
Religion and even Mysticism. This explains why we have: Political Philosophy, Philosophy of History,
Philosophy of Religion, Philosophy of Biology, Philosophy of Medicine, Philosophy of Engineering,
Philosophy of Education, and Philosophy of this… Philosophy of that…. This also tells us why
philosophy is commonly regarded as the queen of all disciplines. The importance of philosophy is
evinced at the peak of academic tutelage with the caption (PhD.) Philosophy Doctorate in an area of
specialization. Whatsoever your course of study, be it Robotic Engineering or Rocket Science at PhD
level, you will be awarded the degree (PhD. Robotic Engineering) Philosophy Doctorate of Robotic
Engineering or (PhD. Rocket Science) Philosophy Doctorate in Rocket Science.

Besides, Philosophy abinitio permeated all human disciplines. As a matter of a fact, ancient
philosophers were all scientists. The like of Thales, Anaximander, Anaximenes, Heraclitus, Pythagoras
of Ephesus (the originator of Pythagorean Theorem), Euclides (the great Mathematician and the
originator of Algebra), Socrates (Plato), and the great Aristotle (the father of Logic) were all scientists.

By ADEROGBA OF SCASSON
The division of disciplines was carried out by Aristotle’s personal editor, Andronicus of Rhodes. It was
Andronicus of Rhodes who divided philosophy into various disciplines we have today. So, we owed the
opportunity of studying Philosophy of Science to Andronicus of Rhodes.

1. What Is Philosophy?

The word Philosophy is derived from two Greek words “Philo” meaning “I Love” and “Sophia”
meaning wisdom. Thus, Philosophy is literarily taken to be the love of wisdom, wisdom here could be
interpreted as knowledge. Therefore, Philosophers are lovers of knowledge. It is a common place in
philosophy to hear philosophers say that “Philosophy has no universal definition. This is because
Philosophy has to do with how we perceive or how we see things. And as such, no two people conceive
or see things the same way. Thus, philosophers themselves do not agree on the nature, scope and
definition of the discipline Philosophy. By implication, Philosophy has therefore been defined or
explained in many ways by different Philosophers:

According to Plato, a Philosopher is a man whose heart is fixed on reality.[1] For Aristotle, Philosophy
begin in wonder, wonder about the knowledge of the truth…[2]. According to Ludwig Wittgenstein,
Philosophical problems emanated from linguistic confusion caused by linguistic bewitchment of our
intelligence by ordinary language and the solution is logical analysis and clarification of meaning.[3]
According to Kolawole Olu-Owolabi, this definition of Philosophy started with David Hume, elaborated
by G.E Moore and finally reified by Ludwig Wittgenstein. This conception is purely dedicated to the
mission of making clear that which is mysterious or fluid. Its essential project is to provide rational
explanation for those ideas that are fundamental to human existence.[4] For H.S Staniland, Philosophy is
the criticism of the idea we live by…[5]. Schwitzgebel defines philosophy as all thought to the person
with the right turn of mind [6]. Philosophy has also been defined as the personal search for truth in any
field by rational means [7].

2. Conceptions of Philosophy

To this end, we can now see various conception sketched at by various definitions considered above. It
is therefore legitimate for us to outline various definitions and classified them under conceptions of
Philosophy.

i. Philosophy as a critical or reflective and contemplative discipline (Rational or Scientific Inquiry)

By ADEROGBA OF SCASSON
 ii. Philosophy as a logical or argumentative enterprise (Logic)
iii. Philosophy as the search for ultimate or fundamental reality (Metaphysics)
iv. Philosophy as an Ideology (Karl Marx political theory)
v. Philosophy as a science of human conduct (Ethics)
vi. Philosophy as a Conceptual Analysis (David Hume, G.E Moore and Wittgenstein)

H.S Staniand’s definition reveals some fundamental ingredients that are quintessential to philosophizing
as highlighted in the conceptions of philosophy above namely; critical, reflective, and argumentative
nature of philosophy. Suffice it to say at this juncture that, any human endearvour that is to pass as
rigorous, critical, reflective, or scientific as the case may be must manifest the self-reflective or critical
nature of philosophy whether in the field of Mathematics, Medcine, Law, Robotic Engineering or
Rocket or Nuclear Science. In the light of this, Rene Descartes declares:

An exercise is critical if and only if it avoids any kind of dogma or triviality.. it is

philosophical if nothing is taken for granted and nothing is accepted without rigorous
scrutiny and criticisms and scientific if no assumption is taken without rational probe…
[8].

Broadly speaking, Philosophy sets the theoretical basis for all disciplines. It is a theoretical activity
aiming, like all theoretical activities, at discovering the truth. It has a subject-matter, and specific
discipline methods, though it is unclear what exactly they are. Reflecting from the foregoing, it is clear
that Philosophy raises pertinent questions about the world, the knowledge of it and what can be done
about it. Philosophical questions can be answered by three construed areas of philosophy;
metaphysics, epistemology and ethics. Metaphysics includes part of philosophy of mind, language and
science. The other part of these philosophies belongs to epistemology, which examines the
cognitive contact with the world. Ethics is the normative branch of philosophy covering in part,
philosophies of law, social philosophy, and aesthetics.

3. Branches of Philosophy

Broadly speaking, scholars have identified about seven areas in philosophy namely: Metaphysics (the
study of ultimate reality), Axiology (the theory of value or rather the study of value), Epistemology
(theory of Knowledge), Ethics (the study of Morality, human behaviours and conducts), Political
Philosophy (the normative study of political concept like liberty, freedom, justice, right, authority,
political state, political system, equity and jurisprudence), Aesthetics (the study of beauty) and Logic

By ADEROGBA OF SCASSON
(the science of human reasoning). However, to meet the need of this study, we shall only limit ourselves
to the four basic branches of philosophy. Philosophy has four major branches and these branches are:

i. Metaphysics
ii. Epistemology
iii. Logic
iv. Ethics
5.1 Metaphysics

The word ‘Metaphysics’ is derived from two Greek words (meta and physika). The word ‘meta’ means
beyond or after while ‘physika’ means physical realm or physical world. Thus, metaphysics means the
study of ultimate reality beyond the physical realm. Metaphysics has often been defined as the inquiry
into what is after or beyond the grasp of senses. This definition is born out of dilemma of Andronicus of
Rhodes who edited Aristotles’s works; after collecting most of Aristotle’s work under the title of
“physics”, was at lost about what title to give to others that fell outside the concern of human physical
world. He decided later to call the works “after the works on physics” (that is, meta-physis) [9].
Andronicus of Rhodes Dilemma is believed to have motivated Arthur Schopenhauer’s view of
Metaphysics as the “knowledge that goes beyond the possibility of experience and nature but renders
nature possible”.[10]

Metaphysics is the branch of philosophy that deals with the study of ultimate realities; realities beyond
our physical world such as; angel, gods, deities, heavens, spirit, death, destiny, fatalism, pre-
determinism, ghost, destiny, dualism, monism, plurality, universality and particularism. Metaphysics can
be divided into two main branches:

a. Ontological metaphysics: The study of ontological realities outside human terrestial world e.g
ghost, death, devil, gods, spirit, reincarnation etc
b. Cosmological metaphysics or Universal Science: This is a branch of metaphysics that studies
realities within human universal but beats human imagination namely: weather, climate, aliens,
ufos, earthquake, volcano, hurricane, galaxies, planetary bodies, metrological study,
astronomical realities etc.

This two branches of metaphysics offer a more balanced approach to approaching and interrogating
metaphysical concerns. A proper definition will therefore see metaphysics as the study of (the totality of

By ADEROGBA OF SCASSON
being and existence), that is, the nature and structure of reality in all its embracing and comprehensive
forms. It seems man is perpetually condemned to probe into metaphysical inquiries, even scientific
minded researchers. It is in the light of this that Immanuel Kant declared that, the tendency toward
metaphysics is an irresistible one:

Man has natural curiosity to know, he wants to understand and be able to explain what he sees and
experience in the world, and what he sees in this world leads him beyond what he sees to metaphysical
world of what he does not see but wanting to explain. The death of a loved one makes him wanting to
probe into death, life-hereafter and then heavens and God…He would naturally have to go beyond the
physical world to explain the mystical, the mysterious and the spiritual. [11]

This is how humans are constantly and irresistibly drawn into the realm of metaphysics daily. Notable
among the known classical metaphysicians are: Thales, Anaximander, Anaximenes, Pythagoras,
Heraclitus, Parmenides, Democritus and Leucippus, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Rene Descartes, Alfred
North Whitehead, Leibnitz, Gorge Berkley, Immanuel Kant, Bertrand Russell, Gottlob Frege etc

5.1.2. Metaphysical Questions

Metaphysics deals with questions such as: What is the nature of ultimate reality? What does it mean for
something to exist? Why are things the way they are? Does God exist? What is death? Is reincarnation
true? What is destiny? What is immortality? Is there life hereafter? What is the difference between
appearance and reality?

5.1.3. Metaphysical Doctrine:

i. Idealism: Genuine knowledge is an idea in human mind (i.e real knowledge is innate and mind
dependent).
ii. Materialism: Matter is real. Genuine knowledge is the knowledge of the world we gain through
human senses and perception.
iii. Monism: Reality is one and absolute.
iv. Dualism: Reality is of two categories namely: mind and body, spiritual and physical
v. Pluralism: Reality is many and multiplicity.
vi. Fatalism: What would be would be irrespective of human action and inaction…Fate and destiny
is preprogrammed.

By ADEROGBA OF SCASSON
 vii. Determinism: Humans have the power to decide their own fate (we decide our fate by our
effort) men are gods.
viii. Appearance and Reality change and permanence.

6. Epistemology

Epistemology has its root in two Greek words (episteme and logos or logy). Going back to history, the
Greek words ‘episteme’ literally means ‘knowledge’ and the ‘logy or logos’ means the study.
Etymologically, epistemology is the theory of knowledge. It is the branch of philosophy that studies the
nature, Problem, limit, scope and structure of knowledge. Epistemology is one of the most important
aspects of philosophy since philosophy itself is essentially an inquiry into the nature of human
knowledge. And much more than this, central to every philosophical inquiry is the concern about the
ingenuity of what we claim to know and how we came about that knowledge.

Therefore, epistemology is mainly concern about justification for knowledge (i.e proof and evidences),
criteria for knowledge (method and means of inquiry).

Epistemological Questions:

6.1. Epistemological Doctrine:

i. Rationalism: Is the epistemological doctrine advocated by Socrates (Plato), Rene Descates,

Bertrand Russell, Immanuel Kant and other rationalists. According to this doctrine, genuine
knowledge is the knowledge acquired through reasoning.
ii. Empiricism: Rationalism is another competing doctrine in epistemology that opposes rationalist
thesis. For the empiricist, genuine knowledge is the knowledge of the external world we acquire
via human senses. For the empiricists, seeing is believing. Chief among the empiricist are:
Aristotle, David Hume, John Locke, George Berkerly, G.E Moore and others.
iii. Skepticism: Scepticism is another epistemological attitude that subjects every human claim to
doubt. Chief among the skeptists are: Gorgia, Protagoras, David Hume etc.

7.1. Ethics:

We may consider ethics to be the "Science of Conduct.” Ethics includes the

fundamental ground rules by which we live our lives. Philosophers such as Socrates and

By ADEROGBA OF SCASSON
Plato have given guidelines for ethical behaviour. Many ethicists consider emerging
ethical beliefs to be legal principles, i.e., what becomes an ethical guideline today is made
into to a law, regulation or rule

Ethics comes from the Greek word ‘ethos’ which means character or ways of behaviour. It refers to a
generally accepted set of principles and standards used by an individual, institution, profession or
society in general (as part of social ethics, professional ethics etc) to guide their thoughts, behaviour and
actions; to determine the goodness/badness or rightness/wrongness of thoughts, behaviour and action.
Ethics is essentially about making the right choices/decisions.

8. Logic:

Logic is the study of the principles and methods of correct reasoning. Put more technically, it is the
study of principles and methods of valid inference. It is not, as is it is often supposed that, logic is the
science of thinking as such. for thinking can take many forms, such as remembering, intuiting,
imagining, and freely associating, which however interesting in themselves, are of little consequence to
the logician. Our concern is with reasoning only. It is true that all reasoning involves thinking, but all
thinking is not reasoning. Some thinking does not involve reasoning. There are two major type of logic
namely: Formal or Deductive Logic and Informal or Inductive Logic.

7.2. Philosophy of Science and Nature

Science has positively affected all the facets of human life. In the area of communication, science and
technology have almost turned the world into a global village. Through science, private and public
health have been greatly improved. Diseases that plague and kill thousands centuries ago have
surrendered to the awesome power of therapeutic drugs cultured in laboratories. With the computers,
tedious tasks are done with dispatch. We must note that the practical dimension of science also brings
along with it some unpalatable consequences which concern the morality of some of the achievements
of science and technology especially in their relation to human beings.

For instance, the harnessing of the nuclear power inherent in the atom brings with it the menace of the
nuclear weapon of mass destruction and the attendant threat of a global nuclear annihilation someday.
Today, while many countries like India and Pakistan along with Russia and the United States of
America are all in the race to amass destructive weapons of mass destruction (all in the bid to safeguard
a global and regional balance of power), other states like North Korea are under pressure to surrender

By ADEROGBA OF SCASSON
their stockpiled arsenal of weapons. These weapons of mass destruction raise the moral problem of why
countries should be allowed to produce weapons that possess the potential to wipe out human existence
[12].

7.2. Science and Technology: Humanity at Risk

In recent years, Human existence and survival seems to be at the mercy of the progress and development
witnessed in the area of science and technology. Science and Technology in turn relies on the
advancement and progress experienced in Information and Communication Technology. The new age is
best described as the age of Information and Communication Technology (ICT). Information
Communication Technology, being a multifaceted, dynamic and multidisciplinary domain affects almost
every aspects of human life including political, cultural, scientific, socio-economic and even security
and military spheres. Advancement in information and communication technology (ICT) and the
accompanying impacts on political, cultural and socio-economic development have led scholars and
researchers to consider a new philosophical phenomenon known as Philosophy of ICT [13].

7.3. Philosophy and Information Communication Technology (ICT)

Information and Communication Technology as a new scientific trend is shaping the direction of our
educational and multinational institutions, and intellectual discourses. This new scientific culture is
equally dictating global political and scientific trend creating new realities and new frontiers in
philosophical studies. To this end, philosophy cannot play a spectator role in this new thinking but,
philosophers must rise as they have done in the course of human history, to play active role in this new
scientific reality. Besides, ICT is fast becoming the prisms to 21 st century scholarship and intellectual
discourses.

In addition, Information and Communication Technology is quintessential to the advancement and

development witnessed in the area of science and technology. A fall out from this culminate the recent
development in robotic and cybernetic engineering, medicine, space warfare and space domain, nuclear
and hypersonic guided weapons that demand philosophical interjections and ethical queries. Of a
peculiar ethical interest is the demise of (International Nuclear Treaty) that heralds the new arms race
among the world powers, putting human and non-human species on the verge of extinction. Besides, the
emerging culture of social media is fast changing our cultural, political and educational atmospheres
creating serious moral, ethical, and cultural issues that demand urgent philosophical adjudication.

By ADEROGBA OF SCASSON
Chiefs among these problems are; internet-fraud popularly known in in Nigeria as (yahoo-yahoo), fake-
news, plagiarism, fact-finding and fact-checking, online-dating, pornography, sex-addiction,
prostitution, indecent dressing and to mention but a few.

To ignore the role of ICT in the face of afore-mentioned societal ills and its accompanying impacts to
political, cultural and socio-economic realities is to do so at ones peril. To this end, it is the task of
Philosophy of science to raise fundamental question that borders on this emerging culture of social
media; an offshoot of philosophy of science. Here, this paper beeps its searchlight on moral and ethical
issues associated with social media, morality of nuclear weapons, nuclear deterrence and the danger of
demise of (INF treaty) which has open-up the new arms race in space domain and the risks that
accompany the development of hypersonic weapons.

As panacea to the impending dangers of ICT as highlighted above that has put both human and non-
human species on the brink of extinction, there is the need to encourage researches in science and
technology to focus on striking the balance between human wellbeing and care for nature. To this end,
we are hereby advocating the need to prepare a new international nuclear treaty involving the world
superpowers including (China, Russia and United States of America) that will see to the destruction of
existing nuclear and hypersonic weapons and limit the development of new ones. before we conclude
our brief discussion on ICT, we must also emphasize the need for the nations of the world to legislate on
the use of social media in line with domestic laws in order to preserve pristine cultural values and to
combat the trend of fake news, internet fraud and other related crimes and moral ills.

It is the concern of Philosophy of science therefore to adjudicate from normative point of view the limit
and temperance of scientific inventions and innovations that could compromise human wellbeing, and
may spell the end of human existence. Philosophy as a second-order- discipline also reserves the moral
responsibility to interrogate the negative impacts of ICT and social media on our pristine cultural value
systems, most especial, the negative impacts of the new social media culture on our children and youths.
It is therefore the sole business of philosophers of scientific stance to set cautions against endless
scientific quest that are inimical to humankind. This is the primary task of philosophy of science.

8. What is Science?

By ADEROGBA OF SCASSON
The word science is derived from the Latin word ‘scientia’ which means knowledge.[13] Science has
been defined generally as any systematized, organised or classified body of knowledge which has been
critically tested as being beyond reasonable doubt. Specifically, Robert Morgan defines it as any activity
resulting in the knowledge and understating of the world around. However, the problem with these
definitions is that they are too all-embracing and hence inadequate. [14].

8. Nature of Philosophy of Science

The basic questions that are likely to pop-up in the philosophy of science are epistemological,
methodological and normative questions such as; how do we get to know about reality? Can we know
for certain? Is scientific knowledge objective and by what principles and method do we form
knowledge? Specific questions in philosophy of science are like “What is scientific knowledge and
how is it different from the other kinds of knowledge?”, “With what kinds of methods is science
done?”, “What are the limits of scientific knowledge?”, “How does science develop?”, “What is the
role of argumentation, logic, confirmations, concepts, and consensus in science?”, “Are
scientific results objective or subjective?”, What can be proven?”, and “What is a law?” [17].

What constitute science proper are the pure and the applied sciences. Some under the positivistic
influence have argued for the inclusion of the social sciences. However, it should be noted that the
scientific status of economics, political science, sociology, geography, psychology and anthropology is
highly debatable. The focus of our analysis will therefore be on the natural sciences, namely, physics,
biology, astronomy, chemistry, physiology, genetics and so on whose scientific status not in doubt. The
subject matter of these scientific disciplines is the natural phenomena and their properties, natures and
behaviours [18]. In the light of the foregoing, science can be redefined as the body of knowledge
conducted on objective principles and involving the systematic observation of material objects in the
universe.

A cursory look at various characteristic of scientific enterprise will further deepen our knowledge on the
nature of science: The following are the basic characteristics that define the true nature of scientific
knowledge:

8.1. Concrete Object:

By ADEROGBA OF SCASSON
Science deals with material objects, that is, with objects that are particular, observable and identifiable
whether in practice or in principle. We said “in principle” because it is not all objects of science that are
directly observable. Objects such as the atoms (and atomic particles), the genes and so on are not open to
direct observation as other material objects. Science, in other words, does not deal with abstract ideas or
beings which are spiritual rather than material. Thus, the concepts of gods, spirits, witches and ghosts
are outside its operational scope.[19]

8.2. Value Neutrality and Impartiality of the knowledge of the world:

The knowledge character of scientific knowledge is value detached and neutral it does not
accommodate ethnical, tribal, racial or religious sentiments and prejudices. Scientific inquirers,
investigators and researcher are naturally detached from objects of their inquiry. A scientist studying
specie of plant, animal, fish, insect, stone or rock is naturally detached from his/her object of inquiry.
But this is not the same case with social scientist like: Political scientist, demographer, psychologist or
sociologist that is directly involve or connected to the object of his/her inquiry and may be induced
directly or indirectly to alter the result of their inquiry to favour or satisfy certain needs. The scientific
procedure provided the same result irrespective of who is performing or employing it.

8.3. Impersonal:

Science is also public in character. This means that the scientific method, techniques and findings are
not accessible only to a selected individuals but to the generality of those who are scientifically minded.
For instance, the gravitational law, the law of thermodynamics, the law of gravitational force, the law of
motion, the law guiding the behaviour of cloud formation, the law responsible for the motion of
planetary bodies, and so on are open to public scrutiny and tests by those who have the ability to do so.
[21].

Well organized and systematized knowledge: Another significant feature deducible from the definitions
is that science involves systematization and organisation. This is that accounts for the rationality of the
scientific enterprise. In other words, science is not just a haphazard collection of facts or an investigation
carried out arbitrarily.[20]

9. Method of Science

By ADEROGBA OF SCASSON
Science has been defined as a class of activities which includes observation, description, and
theoretical explanation; or knowledge that is gained through experience; or knowledge that has been
logically arranged in the form of general laws [21]. Science can also be defined as structured
knowledge derived from the facts [22]. It is the systematic way of studying the world we live in. The
philosophy of science deals with issues such as the foundations of science, its assumptions and
limitations, its implications, and what constitutes scientific progress.

9.1. Observation

The first step in scientific investigation is to acquire facts related to a particular thing of interest. To do
this we have to begin with observation. The simplest conceivable use of experience consists in noticing
something seen, heard, felt or smelled. This is the meaning of observation: the use of the senses to
acquire particular facts [23]. Observation is both a mental and physical activity. This is because in order
to observe, our attention must not only be directed in one direction, we must know that we are looking
for something [24]. There are two different types of observation in the history of science. These are the
accidental observation and the deliberate or directed observation. Let us see what is involved in both
types.

9.1.1. Accidental Observation:

These are the kind of observations that are not initially intended but which when noticed give rise to
more conscious observation and later provoke further enquiry. In fact, some important scientific
observations have been made accidentally. Becquerl’s famous discovery of the radioactivity of uranium
compounds arose accidentally from his leaving a photographic plate in the neighborhood of the
radioactive material. The same goes for the accidental observation of the falling of an apple which led to
Newton’s gravitational law [25].

9.1.2. Deliberate or Intentional Observation:

It has often been said that the haphazard gathering of facts through observation seldom have much
contribution to make to the discovery of generalizations, theories and principle sought by science.

By ADEROGBA OF SCASSON
According to Jevon, “to observe is merely to notice events and changes which have been produced in the
ordinary course of nature without being able to control those changes. [26].

9.2. Observation and Experiment

In observing, experimentation may be involved but it is not necessary the case that every observation
involved experimentation. Most deliberate observations involve experimentation. So, every meaningful
experiment requires deliberate and organized observation. Mellone defines a scientific experiment as
“the construction of a typical and crucial case on a plan thought out in advance, in order to test a
hypothesis or decide a question which has arisen”. The line of distinction between an observation and an
experiment is a thing one. If scientific observation is an active and selective process, the resemblance it
has to experiment is obvious.

Experiment has some obvious advantages over observation. Experiment saves researcher long waiting
time to get result unlike natural observation since all factors could be controlled or manipulated to get
desired result. Many phenomena in nature are too minute to be noticed or too soft to be dealt with in
ordinary experience. Experiments provide the opportunity of dealing with such objects. It enables the
investigator for instance to arrange the processes of such phenomena for intense study.[27] Besides,
experiment enables inquirer to observe specimen or an object of experiment under varying
circumstances to decide which condition is suitable for certain result and to achieved desired result.

9.3. Hypothesis

The result of observation and experiment is facts that have been gathered regarding the phenomenon in
question. Facts await the litmus test of hypothesis in order to validate their veracity. What the researcher
does at this juncture is to put his facts together in a coherent manner and begin to think creatively about
them. The result of such mental cogitations is a conjectural statement which is called a hypothesis. A
hypothesis refers to the formulation of possible solutions to a given problem or the possible explanations
of a given phenomenon. [28]

9.4. Scientific Law

A scientific law is a basic principle, generalization, regularity or rule that holds true universally under
particular conditions. Laws are developed from facts or developed mathematically to explain and predict
individual occurrences or instances [29]. Scientific laws or laws of science are statements, based

By ADEROGBA OF SCASSON
on repeated experiments or observations, that describe or predict a range of natural phenomena.
Scientific laws summarize the results of experiments or observations, usually within a certain range of
application. According to Aigbodioh, a scientific law is “a universal generalisation which states an
invariant relationship between natural facts, properties or features of things. [30]

In general, the accuracy of a law does not change when a new theory of the relevant phenomenon is
worked out, but rather the scope of the law's application, since the mathematics or statement
representing the law does not change. As with other kinds of scientific knowledge, scientific laws do not
express absolute certainty, as mathematical theorems or identities do. A scientific law may be
contradicted, restricted, or extended by future observations. We have many laws that have undergone the
highlighted scientific procedural methods and are widely accepted. We have: Conservation laws, Laws
of classical mechanics, Laws of gravitation and relativity, Thermodynamics, Electromagnetism,
Photonics, Laws of quantum mechanics, Radiation law.

10. Inductive Method and Its Problems

Inductive inference is a type of method that many scientists use to arrive at general claims from
premises and observed samples. The method of induction is fully captured by various scientific
procedure highlighted above. Scientific method that begins from observation, experiment, formulation
of hypothesis and it terminates at scientific law or theory. Historically however, philosophers such as
David Hume have argued that inductive reasoning is unjustified and problematic in many ways. One of
the problems pointed out by David Hume stems from traditional epistemological outlook that ‘every
event must have cause(s)’. Hume contested the assumed logical connection between events and
attributed causes. he is of the opinion that the only thing between events and their causes are nothing but
contiguity, uniformity and succession. So the traditional Yoruba adage that says;

“Aje ke lana, omo ku loni… tani o mop e aje ana lopomoje… a witch cried yesterday and
the baby dies today… who does not know that it was yesterday witch that was
responsible for the death of the child…”

David Hume denied the veracity of the above claim on the ground that, there are no rational grounds and
logical connections between events and their assumed causes. Before Hume created his argument, this
inference would seem justifiable so long as the observation was made in a range of cases that
represented it. Hume however brings to question, “… how we could be sure that the regularities that are

By ADEROGBA OF SCASSON
observed within a representative sample should increase the likelihood that the unrestricted
generalization is true” [31].

Obviously, Hume’s resentment on induction becomes apparent since to justify a claim on the basis of
another claim, one will need other claims. That is, to justify an event, we need other events that will
serve as the causes of the initial event. This other events in turn require other events… then we go on in
circular reasoning ad infinitum.

This proves that in order to defend that an inductive inference is justifiable; one must use yet another
inductive claim. The epistemic support for inductive inferences is circular. From this, we conclude that
there can be no non-circular justification for inductive inferences. This dilemma is known as the
problem of induction and leaves us with the issue of whether we can justify inductive reasoning
considering the fact Hume has presented us with the problem of induction. Do we conclude that
induction needs no justification? Do we side with epistemic internalists who believe one must always
have supporting grounds?

This is exactly the problem inherent in the pride scientific method that is now considered as the
universal currency in scholarship. So, it is the task of philosophers to always remind scholars and
researchers the problem of induction and possibly suggest other options.

11. Thomas Kuhn’s Method of Science: The Paradigm Shift

Thomas Kuhn, an American philosopher, in his famous book The Structure of Scientific Revolution
(1962) pointed out that science does not always advance in gradual and stately fashion commonly
attributed to it as stated in the traditional method of science as outlined above. He argued that scientific
research and thought are defined by “paradigms” or conceptual world-views. Scientists typically accept
a prevailing paradigm and try to extend its scope by refining theories. According to Kuhn, after a
scientific discipline matures, its history consists of long periods of stasis punctuated by occasional
revolutions of this sort. Thus, a scientific discipline goes through several distinct types of stages as it
develops. [32]

Thomas Samuel Kuhn presented an interesting scientific method in his famous book the Structure of
Scientific Revolution. Here, Kuhn’s demonstrated his philosophical acumen in his popular dictum “The
Paradigm Shift). The popular scientific method or theory he called the thesis… (the old Paradigm), the

By ADEROGBA OF SCASSON
emerging theory or method he called the antithesis (opposing paradigm). And the New method or new
theory he called the Synthesis (New paradigm).

11.1. The Pre-Paradigmatic Stage

Before a scientific discipline develops, there are various competing schools, each of which has a
fundamentally different conception of what the basic problems of the discipline are and what criteria
should be used to evaluate theories about that subject matter.

11.2. The Emergence of Normal Science

Out of the many competing schools that clutter the scientific landscape during a discipline's pre-
paradigmatic period, one may emerge that subsequently dominates the discipline. The practitioners of
the scientific discipline rally around a school that proves itself able to solve many of the problems it
poses for itself and that hold great promise for future research. There is typically, a particular
outstanding achievement that causes the discipline to rally around the approach of one school. Kuhn
calls such an achievement a "paradigm." Normal science is characterized by nearly unanimous assent by
the members of a scientific discipline to a particular paradigm. In SSR, Kuhn uses the term paradigm to
refer to two very different kinds of things. [

11.3. Paradigms as Exemplars

Kuhn at first uses the term "paradigm" to refer to the particular, concrete achievement that defines by
example the course of all subsequent research in a scientific discipline. In his 1969 postscript to
Structure of Scientific Revolution, Kuhn refers to an achievement of this sort as an "exemplar." Among
the numerous examples of paradigms Kuhn gives are Newton's mechanics and theory of gravitation,
Franklin's theory of electricity, and Copernicus' treatise on his heliocentric theory of the solar
system[32].

These works outlined a unified and comprehensive approach to a wide-ranging set of problems in their
respective disciplines. As such, they were definitive in those disciplines. The problems, methods,
theoretical principles, metaphysical assumptions, concepts, and evaluative standards that appear in such
works constitute a set of examples after which all subsequent research was patterned.

11.4. The Scientific Community

By ADEROGBA OF SCASSON
According to Kuhn, a scientific discipline is defined socially: it is a particular scientific community,
united by education (e.g., texts, methods of accreditation), professional interaction and communication
(e.g., journals, conventions), as well as similar interests in problems of a certain sort, and acceptance of
a particular range of possible solutions to such problems. The scientific community, like other
communities, defines what is required for membership in the group.

11.5. Normal Science as "Puzzle-Solving"

According to Kuhn, once a paradigm has been accepted by a scientific community, subsequent research
consists of applying the shared methods of the disciplinary matrix to solve the types of problems defined
by the exemplar. Since the type of solution that must be found is well defined and the paradigm
"guarantees" that such a solution exists (though the precise nature of the solution and the path that will
get you to a solution is often not known in advance), Kuhn characterizes scientific research during
normal or paradigmatic science as "puzzle-solving."

11.6. The Emergence of Anomaly and Crisis

Though the paradigm "guarantees" that a solution exists for every problem that it poses, it occasionally
happens that a solution is not found. If the problem continues to persist after repeated attempts to solve it
within the framework defined by the paradigm, scientists may become acutely distressed and a sense of
crisis may develop within the scientific community. This sense of desperation may lead some scientists
to question some of the fundamental assumptions of the disciplinary matrix. Typically, competing
groups will develop strategies for solving the problem, which at this point has become an "anomaly,"
that congeal into differing conceptual "schools" of thought much like the competing schools that
characterize pre-paradigmatic science. The fundamental assumptions of the paradigm will become
subject to widespread doubt, and there may be general agreement that a replacement must be found
(though often many scientists continue to persist in their view that the old paradigm will eventually
produce a solution to the apparent anomaly).

11.7. The Birth and Assimilation of a New Paradigm

Eventually, one of the competing approaches for solving the anomaly will produce a solution that,
because of its generality and promise for future research, gains a large and loyal following in the
scientific community. This solution comes to be regarded by its proponents as a concrete, definitive

By ADEROGBA OF SCASSON
scientific achievement that defines by example how research in that discipline should subsequently be
conducted. In short, this solution plays the role of an exemplar for the group--thus, a new paradigm is
born. Not all members of the scientific community immediately rally to the new paradigm, however.

Some resist adopting the new problems, methods, theoretical principles, metaphysical assumptions,
concepts, and evaluative standards implicit in the solution, confident in their belief that a solution to the
anomaly will eventually emerge that preserves the theoretical, methodological, and evaluative
framework of the old paradigm. Eventually, however, most scientists are persuaded by the new
paradigm's growing success to switch their loyalties to the new paradigm. Those who do not may find
themselves ignored by members of the scientific community or even forced out of that community's
power structure (e.g., journals, university positions). Those who hold out eventually die. The transition
to the new paradigm is complete.

12. Conclusion and Recommendations

This chapter, like any other philosophical pieces posits the common problems inherent in most scientific
method since most of the scientific method and theories, if not all of them rely on inductive reasoning to
arrive at their desired results. While this chapter encourages students to imbibe scientific spirit and
attitude of critical and reflective inquiry however, the chapter also offers a reminder that the battle of
method, idea, and theory in intellectual sphere is yet from over. Like Thomas Samuel Kuhn, the next
phase of our paradigm shift awaits you. Take the plunge.

By ADEROGBA OF SCASSON