Scientific Reasoning During Inquiry

2017 ◽  
pp. 105-117 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Andersen ◽  
Merce Garcia-Mila
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Reasoning

Inquiry Learning

2009 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 117-127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Astrid Wichmann ◽  
Detlev Leutner
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Reasoning ◽  
Inquiry Learning ◽  
Instructional Support ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Knowledge Test ◽  
Simulation Based ◽  
Scientific Experiments ◽  
Specific Support ◽  
Science Classes

Seventy-nine students from three science classes conducted simulation-based scientific experiments. They received one of three kinds of instructional support in order to encourage scientific reasoning during inquiry learning: (1) basic inquiry support, (2) advanced inquiry support including explanation prompts, or (3) advanced inquiry support including explanation prompts and regulation prompts. Knowledge test as well as application test results show that students with regulation prompts significantly outperformed students with explanation prompts (knowledge: d = 0.65; application: d = 0.80) and students with basic inquiry support only (knowledge: d = 0.57; application: d = 0.83). The results are in line with a theoretical focus on inquiry learning according to which students need specific support with respect to the regulation of scientific reasoning when developing explanations during experimentation activities.

The Impact of Alluring Information on Scientific Reasoning

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca E. Rhodes ◽  
Fernando Rodriguez ◽  
Priti Shah
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Reasoning ◽  
The Impact

The Thanatosis of Enlightenment

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 83-106
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Reasoning ◽  
Phenomenological Theory ◽  
Human Mind ◽  
Unsuccessful Attempt ◽  
Trace Back ◽  
Methodological Errors ◽  
Psychological Models ◽  
History Of ◽  
Living Nature ◽  
Dialectic Of Enlightenment

The article analyzes methodological errors Theodore Adorno and Max Horkheimer’s Dialectic of Enlightenment, particularly their incorrect use of the concepts of mimicry and mimesis. The author of the article maintains that the leaders of the Frankfurt School made a mistake that threatens to undermine their argument when they juxtaposed mimesis and the attraction to death, which has led philosophers to trace back to mimesis the desire for destruction that is found in a civilization constructed by instrumental reasoning. The author reviews the arguments of the Dialectic of Enlightenment and emphasizes the unsuccessful attempt to fuse Freudian and Hegelian methods, which exposes the instability of opposing scientific reasoning to “living” nature. Some amusing quotations from Roger Caillois, who refused to think of mimesis as something entirely rational, are also brought to bear. As Brassier gradually unfolds Adorno and Horkheimer’s thesis, he indicates the consequences of their mistake, which confined thinkers to the bucolic dungeon of “remembering” the authentic nature that they cannot abandon because they have denied themselves access to both reductionist psychological models and to phenomenological theory as such. Brassier delineates the boundaries of this trap and notes the excessive attachment of the Dialectic of Enlightenment to the human. Brassier goes on to describe the prospects for a civilization of enlightenment: a mimesis of death in both senses (death imitates and is imitated) finds its highest expression in the technological automation of the intellect, which for Adorno and Horkheimer means the final implementation of the self-destructive mind. However, for Brassier it means the rewriting of the history of reason in space. This topological rewriting of history, carried out through an enlightenment, reestablishes the dynamics of horror more than mythical temporality: it will become clear that the human mind appears as the dream of a mimetic insect.

Characteristics of Scientific Inquiry

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Miksza ◽  
Kenneth Elpus
Keyword(s):  
Philosophy Of Science ◽  
Scientific Inquiry ◽  
Scientific Reasoning ◽  
Scientific Community ◽  
Scientific Progress ◽  
Statistical Tools ◽  
Basic Characteristics ◽  
Historical Developments

This chapter introduces the reader to basic characteristics of science and situates the design and analysis considerations presented throughout the book within the context of scientific inquiry. A brief description of key historical developments regarding the philosophy of science is provided. An overview of the fundamental aspects of inductive and deductive scientific reasoning and the importance of falsification to scientific progress is presented. In addition, the values of objectivity and transparency as well as the importance of scientific community are stressed. The usefulness of statistical tools for helping researchers clarify their questions, establish criteria for their judgments, and communicate evidence for their claims is also discussed.

scholarly journals COVID-19: scientific reasoning, pragmatism and emotional bias

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Luciano Gattinoni ◽  
John J. Marini ◽  
Davide Chiumello ◽  
Mattia Busana ◽  
Luigi Camporota
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Reasoning ◽  
Emotional Bias
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document