World Hypotheses
Encyclopedia
World Hypotheses: a study in evidence (also known as World Hypotheses: Prolegomena to systematic philosophy and a complete survey of metaphysics) is a book written by Stephen Pepper
, published in 1942.
In World Hypotheses, Pepper demonstrates the error of logical positivism
, that there is no such thing as data free from interpretation, and that root metaphors are necessary in epistemology. In other words, objectivity is a myth because there is no such thing as pure, objective fact. Consequently, an analysis is necessary to understand how to interpret these 'facts.' Pepper does so by developing the "[root metaphor method, ...] and outlines what he considers to be four basically adequate world hypotheses (world views or conceptual systems): formism, mechanism, contextualism, and organicism." He identifies the strengths and weaknesses of each of the world hypotheses as well as the paradoxical and sometimes mystifying effects of the effort to synthesize them.
and dogmatism while explaining that each are essentially two sides of the same coin. He has no problem with relative skepticism, where one suspends belief until justification is provided. But utter skepticism is essentially a dogmatist who doubts all things, always. Pepper defines a dogmatist "as one whose belief exceeds his cognitive grounds for belief." If neither position of utter skepticism and dogmatism are cognitively justifiable, then knowledge about the world will be somewhere in between. Specifically, between Common Sense and Refined Knowledge.
Once you embark into refined knowledge, there are certain criteria as to what constitutes 'evidence.' In other words, there are rules governing how we know what we know (This should be recognized as an epistemological concept). And depending on the choice of your Root Metaphor (described below), different criteria exist as to what constitutes good evidence.
Inadequate Root Metaphors
(Relatively) Adequate Root Metaphors
, 1988, 50, 97-111. link
Stephen Pepper
Stephen C. Pepper was an American philosopher.-References:*http://people.sunyit.edu/~harrell/Pepper/Index.htm*http://people.sunyit.edu/~harrell/Pepper/pep_efron.htm-External Links:...
, published in 1942.
In World Hypotheses, Pepper demonstrates the error of logical positivism
Logical positivism
Logical positivism is a philosophy that combines empiricism—the idea that observational evidence is indispensable for knowledge—with a version of rationalism incorporating mathematical and logico-linguistic constructs and deductions of epistemology.It may be considered as a type of analytic...
, that there is no such thing as data free from interpretation, and that root metaphors are necessary in epistemology. In other words, objectivity is a myth because there is no such thing as pure, objective fact. Consequently, an analysis is necessary to understand how to interpret these 'facts.' Pepper does so by developing the "[root metaphor method, ...] and outlines what he considers to be four basically adequate world hypotheses (world views or conceptual systems): formism, mechanism, contextualism, and organicism." He identifies the strengths and weaknesses of each of the world hypotheses as well as the paradoxical and sometimes mystifying effects of the effort to synthesize them.
Dogmatism
Pepper begins by demonstrating the very weak positions of utter skepticismSkepticism
Skepticism has many definitions, but generally refers to any questioning attitude towards knowledge, facts, or opinions/beliefs stated as facts, or doubt regarding claims that are taken for granted elsewhere...
and dogmatism while explaining that each are essentially two sides of the same coin. He has no problem with relative skepticism, where one suspends belief until justification is provided. But utter skepticism is essentially a dogmatist who doubts all things, always. Pepper defines a dogmatist "as one whose belief exceeds his cognitive grounds for belief." If neither position of utter skepticism and dogmatism are cognitively justifiable, then knowledge about the world will be somewhere in between. Specifically, between Common Sense and Refined Knowledge.
Evidence
There is a tension between Common Sense and Refined Knowledge. Common sense is ubiquitous and ever present, and therefore gives a strong sense of certainty. But once you reflect upon common sense, it is no longer common sense and has moved into the realm of refined knowledge. To a large extent, the philosophy of science, and science in general, is interested in this shift.Once you embark into refined knowledge, there are certain criteria as to what constitutes 'evidence.' In other words, there are rules governing how we know what we know (This should be recognized as an epistemological concept). And depending on the choice of your Root Metaphor (described below), different criteria exist as to what constitutes good evidence.
Root Metaphors
Pepper presents two types of root metaphors.Inadequate Root Metaphors
- MysticismMysticismMysticism is the knowledge of, and especially the personal experience of, states of consciousness, i.e. levels of being, beyond normal human perception, including experience and even communion with a supreme being.-Classical origins:...
- AnimismAnimismAnimism refers to the belief that non-human entities are spiritual beings, or at least embody some kind of life-principle....
(Relatively) Adequate Root Metaphors
- Formism
- MechanismMechanism (philosophy)Mechanism is the belief that natural wholes are like machines or artifacts, composed of parts lacking any intrinsic relationship to each other, and with their order imposed from without. Thus, the source of an apparent thing's activities is not the whole itself, but its parts or an external...
- ContextualismContextualismContextualism describes a collection of views in philosophy which emphasize the context in which an action, utterance, or expression occurs, and argues that, in some important respect, the action, utterance, or expression can only be understood relative to that context...
- OrganicismOrganicismOrganicism is a philosophical orientation that asserts that reality is best understood as an organic whole. By definition it is close to holism. Plato, Hobbes or Constantin Brunner are examples of such philosophical thought....
Jargon
- dubitanda: Pepper's jargon for Common Sense
- data: Pepper's jargon for Multiplicative Corroboration, which simply refers to repeated empirical observation. If two people read a thermometer and agree on the reading, there has been Multiplicative Corroboration. In layman's terms, we call this data.
- danda: Pepper's jargon for Structural Corroboration, which in layman's terms is similar to Logical Data.
Book review
Pepper, Stephen C. (1942). World hypotheses: A study in evidence. Berkeley: University of California Press. Reviewed in Journal of the Experimental Analysis of BehaviorJournal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior
The Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior was established in 1958 as apeer-reviewed, psychology journal, that publishes fundamental research about the experimental analysis of behavior....
, 1988, 50, 97-111. link