Feynman: Science "Proves" Nothing, Discovers Everything

(This blog entry is part two of a half-dozen reflections that steal teaching ideas from Richard Feynman, the Nobel Laureate physicist, atomic bomb developer, colorful personality, and pretty darn good teacher.)

Some think the strength of science is that "it" speaks in authoritative absolutes. Or that "it" PROVES things. It is not uncommon to hear science conjured in almost anthropomorphic, if not completely deified tones:"Science has proven that...!" As if science has a sentient agency.

Feynman looks at science in a remarkably different way, but a way which, if given proper reflection, does not diminish the power of science - but highlights its strengths. He makes a few distinctions in his view that may help us "laymen" have a greater appreciation for science and scientists.

• First, he acknowledges that SCIENCE doesn't really DO anything - but rather, science is a description of the actions of SCIENTISTS.
• Second, he points out that one of the main jobs of scientists is GUESSING. 
• Third, he finds epistemological authority to rest in the RESULTS, not the scientist.
• Fourth, he admits that the scientist doesn't PROVE things - and indeed, doesn't set out to prove anything. Rather, the scientist seeks to DISPROVE his own hypothesis. (Which is a primary strength of the scientific method!)

Note these comments in Feynman's lecture below:

"Now I’m going to discuss how we would look for a new law. In general, we look for a new law by the following process. First, we guess it (audience laughter), no, don’t laugh, that’s the truth. Then we compute the consequences of the guess, to see what, if this is right, if this law we guess is right, to see what it would imply and then we compare the computation results to nature or we say compare to experiment or experience, compare it directly with observations to see if it works. If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong. In that simple statement is the key to science. It doesn’t make any difference how beautiful your guess is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are who made the guess, or what his name is … If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong. That’s all there is to it."

This humble approach is far from the booming voice of authoritarian edicts often associated with scientific statements. But it is more productive. It invites knowledge and opens minds rather than shutting down conversations. It is also more realistic; it acknowledges our remaining ignorance, but frames it as a frontier for discovery. It sets us on a path of exploring the wondrous unknown. The "know-it-all" attitude has a chilling effect on gaining knowledge, but the "Feynman attitude" is a useful approach in all disciplines.

"We can imagine that this complicated array of moving things which constitutes 'the world' is something like a great chess game being played by the gods, and we are observers of the game. We do not know what the rules of the game are; all we are allowed to do is to watch the playing. Of course, if we watch long enough, we may eventually catch on to a few of the rules." (Richard Feynman, The Feynman Lectures on Physics)

*Recommended companion readings: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Thomas Kuhn; Against Method, Paul Feyerabend;  The Order of Things, Michel Foucault.

Your Accent Gives You Away

After a little while, those standing there went up to Peter and said, “Surely you are one of them; your accent gives you away.” Then he began to curse... - Matthew 26:73

One thing this story makes clear: if you want to maintain anonymity and not be seen as an outsider from a dominant group, (an Other,) then you might wanna keep quiet in their company.

For those of us who study issues related to discourse communities and language groups, neglecting the impact of "accent" can leave a lot of meat on the research bone. You might appreciate this clip from the BBC's Channel 4. (It might be considered a companion piece to my blog entry on the ESPN commercial on Manchester slang.)

This could enhance discussions of language as an instrument of: power, segregation, ethnic identification, character assessment, etc. It may even tie-in to teaching about RP (received pronunciation), conformity and globalization, etc.

And, no, I am not a Southerner. Why do Y'all ask?
DOH! Dadgum it! *&^%#!

Buddy the Elf, Internet Free Candy, and Plagiarism

If saw "Elf" over the holidays, then you will remember this scene - Buddy the Elf is preparing to go to New York City to find his father when Santa offers him some advice, including the following:

"Well, there are some things you should know.

First off, you see gum on The street,

Leave it there. It's not free candy."

Of course, when Buddy arrives in NYC, he can't resist the "free candy" on the streets, the handrails, etc...Funny!

 ---------------

If you've taught a class that involves research, you will remember this scene - Students are preparing to complete a class to earn their degrees, and we offer them advice, including the following:

"To do good research, you should know some things.

First off, just because you can cut and paste something,

that doesn't mean it is good information.

Find reputable sources and cite them."

Of course, when your students actually get to writing the paper, they sometimes find random "free candy" on the internet to be irresistible. Not so funny.

-------------

I ran across an informative, if less-than-encouraging, article titled "The Top 10 Internet Sources College Students Us May Discourage You."  Oh, yeah, it does discourage us - especially after we've introduced them to the wealth of scholarly online resources that are available through our college or university libraries. I mean - millions of dollars worth of resources at their finger tips, peer-reviewed articles from the most erudite experts in every subject, ground-breaking studies in every field, and they "Google" for info on "steroids?"

(Thankfully, there are no sharp objects nearby as I write this. Anyway - take deep breaths and remain calm, Randy...)

So, I remind myself - and if it helps, you can remind yourself, too - our students are sort of like Buddy - this is their first trip to the big academic city. I will try to help them understand research and intellectual integrity from a broad view that deals with credibility, critical thinking, ethos, and what it means to be a "collegial" member of their new academic community. I will use a variety of approaches ranging from our official plagiarism statements to the story of Buddy the Elf. And I will keep telling myself that it's a process, and that it is my job to help my students (and colleagues) to develop an integrated approach to 21st-century digital literacy.

And I may or may not pass along this tidbit shared with me on Facebook recently:

ESPN, Culture and Speaking "English" Slang

At some point in the term, when teaching rhetorics, critical thinking, cultural literacies, speech, composition, or other topics - I find it important to discuss how language is a culturally/socially constructed semiotic system. (I usually work from a broader intro that looks at how ontology, epistemology and semiology treat a "thing," but that's another story.)

I am planning to incorporate these ESPN commercials to help students think about how language (in this case, English) is a living, growing set of signifiers and signifieds. Maybe some of my colleagues in related fields would be able to make creative instructional use of these artifacts as well...

Video one is the commercial I saw first - and though I had no idea what these guys were "saying" - I got the idea: the speakers seem to be exactly alike from a first-blush broad-brush categorizing of the individuals as being from the UK - but each views the other as a polar opposite.

A Second video (now disappeared from the web) slows the action down and adds definitions to the "slang" English from across the pond.

So, don't be a right divvy - spice up your sessions with these discussion starters/illustrations. And remember which video is which, or you'll look like a proper digital plonker.

...

Slippery Slope and Cable TV

In my Critical Thinking class, we deal with "Fallacies that Masquerade as Logic." If you teach Rhetoric or Forensics or Writing or Speech, you may deal with the same issues - like, for instance, the "Slippery Slope" argument. You know - if you give them an inch, they will take a mile, etc. I found some of the most entertaining examples for this logical fallacy in the Direct TV commercials below...

Don't Have a Grandson with a Dog Collar:

Don't Wake Up in a Roadside Ditch

 

While these examples "make visible" the rhetoric of such arguments, it might be prudent to note that some slopes actually ARE slippery, too.