Science & Education

, Volume 9, Issue 3, pp 219–246

The Nature of Science and the Role of Knowledge and Belief

  • William W. Cobern
Article

Abstract

In everyday language we tend to think of ‘knowledge’ as reasoned belief that a proposition is true and the natural sciences provide the archetypal example of what it means to know. Religious and ideological propositions are the typical examples of believed propositions. Moreover, the radical empiricist worldview so often associated with modern science has eroded society's meaningful sense of life. Western history, however, shows that knowledge and belief have not always been constructed separately. In addition, modern developments in the philosophy and history of science have seriously undermined the radical empiricist's excessive confidence in scientific methods. Acknowledging in the science classroom the parallel structure of knowledge and belief, and recognizing that science requires a presuppositional foundation that is itself not empirically verifiable would re introduce a valuable discussion on the meaning of science and its impact on life. Science would less likely be taught as a `rhetoric of conclusions'. The discussion would also help students to gain a firmer integration of science with other important knowledge and beliefs that they hold.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Appleyard, B.: 1992, Understanding the Present — Science and the Soul of Modern Man, Anchor Books Doubleday, New York.Google Scholar
  2. Barber, B.: 1997, ‘Book Review: Science, Jews, and Secular Culture: Studies in Mid-Twentieth-Century American History’, Academe 83(4), 47-49.Google Scholar
  3. Bauer, H. H.: 1992, Scientific Literacy and the Myth of the Scientific Method, University of Illinois Press, Urbana, IL.Google Scholar
  4. Braaten, C. E.: 1992, ‘Protestants and Natural Law’, First Things 19, 20-26.Google Scholar
  5. Bunge, M.: 1996, ‘In Praise of Intolerance to Charlatanism in Academia’, in P. R. Gross, N. Levitt & M. W. Lewis (eds.), The Flight from Science and Reason, New York Academy of Sciences, New York, 96-115.Google Scholar
  6. Burtt, E. A.: 1967, The Metaphysical Foundations of Modern Physical Science, Routledge and K. Paul, London, UK.Google Scholar
  7. Cobern, W. W.: 1991, World View Theory and Science Education Research, NARST Monograph No. 3. National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Manhattan, KS.Google Scholar
  8. Cobern, W. W.: 1994, ‘Point: Belief, Understanding, and the Teaching of Evolution’, Journal of Research in Science Teaching 31(5), 583-590.Google Scholar
  9. Cobern, W. W.: 1995, ‘Science Education as an Exercise in Foreign Affairs’, Science & Education 4(3), 287-302.Google Scholar
  10. Cobern, W. W.: 1996, ‘Worldview Theory and Conceptual Change in Science Education’, Science Education 80(5), 579-610.Google Scholar
  11. Cobern, W. W.: 1997, ‘Public Understanding of Science as Seen by the Scientific Community: Do We Need to Re-conceptualize the Challenge and to Re-examine Our Own Assumptions?’ in S. Sjøberg & E. Kallerud (eds.), Science, Technology and Citizenship: The Public Understanding of Science and Technology in Science Education and Research Policy, Norwegian Institute for Studies in Research and Higher Education, Oslo, Norway, 51-74.Google Scholar
  12. Cobern, W. W.: 1998, ‘Science and a Social Constructivist View of Science Education’, in W. W. Cobern (ed.), Socio-cultural Perspectives on Science Education: An International Dialogue, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, the Netherlands, 7-23.Google Scholar
  13. Cobern, W. W. & Aikenhead, G. S.: 1998, ‘Culture and the Learning of Science’, in B. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (eds.), International Handbook of Science Education, Part Two, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, the Netherlands, 39-52.Google Scholar
  14. Cobern, W. W., Gibson, A. T. & Underwood, S. A.: 1999, ‘Everyday Thoughts About Nature: An Interpretive Study of 16 Ninth Graders' Conceptualizations of Nature’, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, in press.Google Scholar
  15. Cobern, W. W. & Loving, C. C.: 1998, ‘The Card Activity: Introducing Teachers to the Philosophy of Science’, in W. McComas (ed.), The Nature of Science in Science Education: Rationales and Strategies, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, the Netherlands, 73-82.Google Scholar
  16. Cobern, W. W. & Loving, C. C.: 1999, ‘Defining “Science” in a Multicultural World: Implications Science Education’, Science Education, in press.Google Scholar
  17. Collingwood, R. G.: 1940, An Essay on Metaphysics, Oxford University Press, London.Google Scholar
  18. Craig, R.: 1990, ‘To Live Is To Be a Searcher of Wisdom’, Curriculum Review 29(8), 7-9.Google Scholar
  19. Crease, R. P.: 1989, ‘Top Scientists Must Fight Astrology — Or All of Us Will Face the Consequences’, The Scientist 3(5), 9 & 11.Google Scholar
  20. Crick, F.: 1994, The Astonishing Hypothesis: The Scientific Search for the Soul, Scribners, New York.Google Scholar
  21. Dadachanji, D. K.: 1998, ‘The Cultural Challenge to Scientific Knowledge’, in The World & I. Google Scholar
  22. Dawkins, R.: 1986, The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe without Design, W. W. Norton & Company, New York.Google Scholar
  23. Dirac, P. A. M.: 1963, ‘The Evolution of the Physicist's Picture of Nature’, Scientific American 208(5), 45-53.Google Scholar
  24. Duhem, P.: 1969, To Save the Phenomena: An Essay on the Idea of Physical Theory from Plato to Galileo, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  25. Duschl, R. A.: 1985, ‘Science Education and the Philosophy of Science: Twenty-five Years of Mutually Exclusive Development’, School Science and Mathematics 85(7), 541-555.Google Scholar
  26. Dyson, F. J.: 1993, ‘Science in Trouble’, American Scholar 62(4), 513-525.Google Scholar
  27. Easterbrook, G.: 1998, ‘Science Sees the Light: The Rediscovery of Higher Meaning’, The New Republic 219(15), 24-29.Google Scholar
  28. Eger, M.: 1989, ‘The 'Interests' of Science and the Problems of Education’, Synthese 81(1), 81-106.Google Scholar
  29. First Things.: 1995, ‘Putting First Things First’, First Things 51, 11-13.Google Scholar
  30. Fish, S.: 1996, ‘Why We Can't All Get Along’, First Things 60, 18-26.Google Scholar
  31. Foster, M. B.: 1934, ‘The Christian Doctrine of Creation and the Rise of Modern Science’, Mind XLIII, 446-468.Google Scholar
  32. Foucault, M.: 1966, Madness and Civilization, Pantheon, New York.Google Scholar
  33. Franklin, S.: 1995, ‘Science as Culture, Cultures of Science’, Annual Review of Anthropology 24, 163-184.Google Scholar
  34. Galileo, G.: 1957, Discoveries and opinions of Galileo, translated by S. Drake, Doubleday, NY.Google Scholar
  35. Gierer, A.: 1997, Gödel Meets Carnap: A Prototypical Discourse on Science and Religion, Zygon 32(2), 207-217.Google Scholar
  36. Grant, E.: 1971, Physical Science in the Middle Ages, Wiley, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  37. Gregory, J. & Miller, S.: 1998, Science in the Public: Communication, Culture, and Credibility, Plenum Trade, New York.Google Scholar
  38. Grinnell, F.: 1987, The Scientific Attitude, Westview Press, Boulder, CO.Google Scholar
  39. Grinspoon, D.: 1998, ‘When I Heard the Learn'd Theologians’, Astronomy 26(12), 52-55.Google Scholar
  40. Gross, P. & Levitt, N.: 1993, Higher Superstition: The Academic Left and Its Quarrels with Science, Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD.Google Scholar
  41. Hallyn, F.: 1990, The Poetic Structure of the World: Copernicus and Kepler, Zone Books, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  42. Harding, S.: 1998, ‘Women, Science, and Society’, Science 281(5383), 1599-1600.Google Scholar
  43. Hart, H.: 1980, The Impasse of Rationality Today, The Association for the Advancement of Christian Scholarship, Toronto.Google Scholar
  44. Hawkins, D.: 1978, ‘Critical Barriers to Science Learning’, Outlook 3, 3-25.Google Scholar
  45. Holton, G.: 1992, ‘Ernst Mach and the Fortunes of Positivism in America’, ISIS 83(1), 27-60.Google Scholar
  46. Holton, G.: 1993, Science and Anti-Science, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  47. Kimball, M. E.: 1967–1968, ‘Understanding the Nature of Science: A Comparison of Scientists and Science Teachers’, Journal of Research in Science Teaching 5, 110-120.Google Scholar
  48. Laudan, L.: 1983, ‘The Demise of the Demarcation Problem’, in R. Laudan (ed.), The Demarcation between Science and Pseudo-Science, Vol. 21, Virginia Tech Center for the Study of Science in Society, Working Papers, 7-35.Google Scholar
  49. Lederman, N. G.: 1992, ‘Students' and Teachers' Conceptions of the Nature of Science: A Review of the Research’, Journal of Research in Science Teaching 29(4), 331-359.Google Scholar
  50. Loving, C. C.: 1991, ‘The Scientific Theory Profile: A Philosophy of Science Models for Science Teachers’, Journal of Research in Science Teaching 28(9), 823-838.Google Scholar
  51. Loving, C. C.: 1997, ‘From the Summit of Truth to the Slippery Slopes: Science Education's Journey through Positivist-Postmodernist Territory’, American Educational Research Journal 34(3), 421-452.Google Scholar
  52. MacIntyre, A.: 1971, Against the Self-Image of the Age: Essays on Ideology and Philosophy, Duckworth, London.Google Scholar
  53. Mahner, M. & Bunge, M.: 1996, Is Religious Education Compatible with Science Education? Science & Education 5(2), 101-123.Google Scholar
  54. Merchant, C.: 1989, The Death of Nature: Women, Ecology, and the Scientific Revolution', Harper & Row, San Francisco, CA.Google Scholar
  55. Mulkay, M.: 1995, Galileo and the Embryos: Religion and Science in Parliamentary Debate over Research on Human Embryos', Social Studies of Science 25(3), 499-532.Google Scholar
  56. Nagel, T.: 1998, ‘The Sleep of Reason’, in The New Republic, 32-38.Google Scholar
  57. National Research Council.: 1996, National Science Education Standards, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  58. Nature: 1997, ‘Science Wars and the Need for Respect and Rigour’, Nature 385(6615), 373.Google Scholar
  59. Needham, R.: 1972, Belief, Language, and Experience, Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  60. Neuhaus, J. R.: 1990, ‘Joshing Richard Rorty’, First Things 8, 14-24.Google Scholar
  61. Noddings, N.: 1993, Educating for Intelligent Belief or Unbelief, Teachers College Press, New York.Google Scholar
  62. Novick, P.: 1988, That Noble Dream: The “Objectivity Question” and the American Historical Profession, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  63. Oliver, J. S. & Koballa, T. R.: 1992, ‘Science Educators Use of the Concept of Belief’, paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  64. Polanyi, M.: 1962, Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  65. Polkinghorne, J.: 1994, The Faith of a Physicist, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
  66. Quine, W. V. & Ullian, J. S.: 1978, The Web of Belief, Random House, New York.Google Scholar
  67. Randall, J. H. Jr.: 1940, The Making of the Modern Mind, Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  68. Robinson, J. T.: 1968, The Nature of Science and Science Teaching, Wadsworth Publishing Co., Belmont, CA.Google Scholar
  69. Robinson, J. T.: 1998, ‘Reflections on Science Teaching and the Nature of Science’, Science & Education 7(6), 635-642.Google Scholar
  70. Ruse, M.: 1993, ‘Speech (audio taped and transcribed–7 pages)’, Annual Meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.Google Scholar
  71. Ruse, M.: 1994, ‘Struggle for the Soul of Science’, The Sciences 34(6), 39-44.Google Scholar
  72. Rutherford, F. J.: 1987, ‘The Character of Elementary Science’, Science and Children 24(4), 8-11.Google Scholar
  73. Sartwell, C.: 1992, ‘Why Knowledge is Merely True Belief’, The Journal of Philosophy 89(4), 167-181.Google Scholar
  74. Schaeffer, F. A.: 1968, Escape from Reason, Inter-Varsity Press, Downers Grove, IL.Google Scholar
  75. Shadish, W. R., & Fuller, S.: 1994, The Social Psychology of Science, The Guilford Press, New York.Google Scholar
  76. Schwab, J. J.: 1960, ‘What Do Scientists Do?’ Behavioral Science 5, 1-27.Google Scholar
  77. Smith, A. M.: 1990, ‘Knowing Things Inside Out: The Scientific Revolution from a Medieval Perspective’, The American Historical Review 95(3), 726-744.Google Scholar
  78. Smith, M. U.: 1994, ‘Counterpoint: Belief, Understanding, and the Teaching of Evolution’, Journal of Research in Science Teaching 31(5), 591-597.Google Scholar
  79. Smith, M. U.: 1995, ‘Believing, Knowing, and Accepting: Epistemology and Semantics in the Science Classroom’, paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching.Google Scholar
  80. Smolicz, J. J. & Nunan, E. E.: 1975, ‘The Philosophical and Sociological Foundations of Science Education: The Demythologizing of School Science’, Studies in Science Education 2, 101-143.Google Scholar
  81. Snow, C. P.: 1964, Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  82. Southerland, S. A.: 1999, ‘Epistemic Universalism and the Shortcomings of Curricular Multicultural Science Education’, Science & Education, this issue.Google Scholar
  83. Veatch, H. B.: 1977, ‘A Neglected Avenue in Contemporary Religious Apologetics’, Religious Studies 13, 29-48.Google Scholar
  84. Weaver, R. M.: 1948, Ideas Have Consequences, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  85. Weinberg, S.: 1988, The First Three Minutes: A Modern View of the Origin of the Universe, New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  86. Wilken, R. L.: 1991, ‘The Christian Intellectual Tradition’, First Things 14, 13-18.Google Scholar
  87. Wilson, E. O.: 1998, Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge, Alfred A. Knopf, New York.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • William W. Cobern
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Teaching, Learning & LeadershipWestern Michigan UniversityKalamazooUSA

Personalised recommendations