Demarcation problem and the nature of science

Demarcation problem and the nature of science

The demarcation problem is the philosophical problem of determining what types of hypotheses should be considered scientific and which ones should be considered non-scientific (Massimo). The rise of the demarcation problem can be dated back to the ancient time when there was a rise of conflict between science and religion, where the primary question on which religious doctrines could be subjected to scientific scrutiny. In order to address the issue, scholars developed a discipline called Philosophy of Science, which was aimed at solving the demarcation problem. However, the demarcation problem has persisted up to today because there has been no right way to answers the concern (Massimo). This essay aims at examining the demarcation problem and the nature of science based on the ideas of John Ziman and Larry Laudan

Views of John Ziman on demarcation problem and the nature of science

John Ziman aimed at providing the concept of what science is. Ziman argued that science had become the stock of the human mind, and everything was supposed to be viewed from the science perspective. Additionally, Zima described science as a very clearly artifact of mankind, which is well documented in history and with definable scope and content. He also defined scientists as recognizable professional practitioners and exponents (Ziman 48). This means that, unlike non-scientific artifacts, science is universal because its scope is well defined in books of history. He feels that other non-scientific disciplines have no logic as their scope change with time. Ziman also defines science as constant, rigorously methodical, academic, logical, and practical. By saying science is constant, Ziman meant that knowledge in science does not change with time. Science is also practical because it is based on the experimentation process and logical because it is based on the material facts(Ziman 48).

According to Ziman, the philosophy of science is quite strange are of study whose aim is to address the demarcation problem. The professional scientists have to be logical and wise enough and be able to work with the guidance provided in theories that exist to address the demarcation problem (Ziman 49). Although the professional scientists may not resolve the issue to the latter, at least they have some bit of knowledge which can be transferred to the young generation. Ziman also feels that both the medical nurses and the public administrators are supposed to have masterly in science. He used the example of Plato’s Republic, and the requirements for one to become a philosopher-king. Study in science is one of the most crucial parts of the training for one to be a leader. This attests to the reason as to why even the public administrators are supposed to have abundant knowledge in science. Ziman also defines science like a piece of public knowledge. This means that every member of society is supposed to have and should have the right to access knowledge in science. Science is important because it is used to validate theories through testing their practical application (Ziman 50)..

Views of Larry Laudan on demarcation problem and the nature of science

Larry Laudan foresaw the demise of the demarcation problem. Laudan first studies the nature of the old demarcation tradition. Some years back, philosophers from the western countries though it was essential to distinguish between knowledge and the mere opinion. They invented a new branch in philosophy called Epistemology, which meant “the study of knowledge (Laudan 115). He also argues that, for one to be a scientist, he or she must deal with the causes of a particular situation, must use the logical boundaries, and must identify the universal thing from what scientifically makes sense. Aristotle sometimes offered a demarcation criterion of the ideas that differentiate science and opinion (Laudan 115). He uses an example of a shipbuilder who knows the whole process of making the ship but does not have to mind any idea concerned with who comes up with the views of shipbuilding technology. Aristotle also argues that science is distinguished from opinion or superstitions by the certainty of its principles. This is because science is based on practical facts and not theoretical terms and explanations. Laudan finally discussed on the modern demarcation tradition. He argues that despite many reformations that occurred in the 1920’s and1930’s, verifications enjoyed mixed fortunes as the theory of meaning. This process was directly related to science and thus could a way of spreading demarcation between science and non-science. However, over time, the non-scientific and pseudo-scientific systems of beliefs have developed verifiable constituents. This has reduced the gap between science and mom-science in terms of logic, and thus with time could lead to the demise of the demarcation problem (Laudan 117).

In conclusion, the two had John Ziman and Larry Laudan had different views on the demarcation problem and nature of science. Both Ziman and Laudan defined science as practical and owing some bit of verification. This makes science more real and universal. Ziman recommends that science should be taught to all irrespective of the career profession because it helps the learners to acquire the basic principles of objectivity and make them think more logically.

Work cited

Laudan, Larry. “The demise of the demarcation problem.” Physics, philosophy, and psychoanalysis.Springer, Dordrecht, 1983.111-127.

Massimo Pigliucci: Nonsense on Stilts: How to Tell Science from Bunk. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010.

Ziman, John. Real science: What it is and what it means. Cambridge University Press, 2002.