Science and Scientific Knowledge

• What is Science?
• Science is derived from the Latin word – scire which means ‘to know’
• Though the word and meaning of science is in most cases misunderstood,
science simply means acquiring knowledge
• However, not all knowledge is science
• Knowledge qualifies to be science only when it is systematic (or methodical
or orderly or logical or organised)
• Consequently, a science is a body of systematic knowledge
• On the other hand, research is a means to advancement of knowledge and
science
• Thus, the purpose of conducting research is to acquire knowledge (or
know reality)
 Knowledge
• Issues surrounding human knowledge and how knowledge is acquired are
not easy to understand or comprehend and have from time immemorial,
been matters of continuing debates among scholars and philosophers, e.g.,
Aristotle, Plato, Socrates, etc.
• Knowledge no matter what it is has something to do with knowing
• Knowledge comes about through two ways:
1. Acquaintance with a thing; the things with which we can be acquainted
are those things of which we are directly aware of – direct awareness
comes about through perception (or observation) and sensation (or
sensing)
2. Description which involves describing the characteristics of a thing
• Most of our knowledge of things is by description
• However knowledge by description depends on the perceptions of the
person describing a thing so this knowledge is mainly personal and
individual as well as probabilistic
• Knowledge has an external reference that is called a fact
• A fact is anything that can exists or can be conceived (visualised?) of
• An important quality of a fact is neither true or false
• So it is what we know about facts which can either be true or false
 Working Definition for Knowledge

• However, in simple terms and for purposes of the GES5881 course,

knowledge may be defined as a familiarity, awareness or
understanding of a phenomena or any observable event or something
or someone in terms their facts, information, descriptions or skills
that are acquired through experience or education or observing,
discovering or learning (Research???)
 Where is Knowledge Found ?
• There are two propositions or claims that society holds as bears of
knowledge (or reality) and these are Judgments and Beliefs
• The Venn Diagram below should help to create in our minds a mental
picture of the relationships among judgments, beliefs and knowledge

• What society claims to know are things contained either judgments or

beliefs
• However not every judgment on its own is equated to knowledge or every
belief on its own is knowledge, as some of our judgments and some of
beliefs even those which are true, may on verification turn out to be false
• Not withstanding the aforesaid and since judgments and beliefs are the only
propositions on knowledge, we can without bias confidently state that
knowledge is found in between judgments and beliefs

Justified Beliefs as Knowledge

• Since human knowledge is in form of judgments or beliefs about a particular
phenomenon, some beliefs are supported by evidence while others are not
• The evidence in support of a belief is based on our:
1. Perceptions
2. Experiences
• Beliefs which are supported by evidence are called justified beliefs
• Since justified beliefs are judgments, thus using our Venn diagram justified
beliefs being both part of beliefs and judgments proves that justified
beliefs are knowledge i.e. knowledge is found in between beliefs and
judgments
• Beliefs not supported by evidence in forms of perceptions or experiences
does not qualify to be justified beliefs, and these are called ordinary beliefs
• Ordinary beliefs are not knowledge
 Justified Beliefs or Knowledge

• Justified Beliefs or Knowledge is found in between the

propositions of Beliefs and Judgments
 Types of Judgments in Justified Beliefs
• Justified beliefs consist of two types of judgments:
1. Direct of Intuitive Judgment
2. Derived Judgment
• A direct judgment is based on our beliefs but not supported by evidence in
form of perceptions or experiences do not qualify to be justified beliefs, and
these are called ordinary beliefs
• Ordinary beliefs are not knowledge
• However, things contained in judgments and beliefs can not on their own be
equated to knowledge, because some of these judgments and beliefs, even
those contained in beliefs may turnout to be false on verification
• comprise of all things and anything that exists or can be conceived (or
imagined) of; these things or anything contained in Truths and Beliefs are
neither true false
• It is what we know about these things which can be either reality or not
reality (false)
• From science point of view knowledge or reality is found somewhere in
between the two propositions of ‘truths’ and ‘beliefs’
• Thus research is conducted so as to uncover this knowledge or reality,
which is found between the two propositions
 Test for Scientific Knowledge

• A test for scientific knowledge is that if something is actually known or

becomes known through conduct of research then it is scientific knowledge
and categorically it can not be FALSE
• Thus, scientific knowledge is that which is known through systematic search
and this scientific knowledge exists within and between society’s
propositions of judgments and beliefs
 Differences between Scientific Knowledge and Ordinary
Knowledge

• The following are some of the differences between scientific knowledge and
ordinary knowledge:
1. Scientific knowledge deals with a particular knowledge, whereas ordinary
knowledge is concerned with the whole body of knowledge
2. Scientific knowledge is unified, organised and systematic reality whereas
ordinary knowledge is mere mass of isolated and disconnected reality
3. Scientific knowledge is arrived at through application special
methodologies and methods (or research) whereas ordinary knowledge
comes about through other knowledge-acquisition means which are not
methodical
• However, scientific knowledge and ordinary knowledge are not different in
type, but only differ due to in their degrees of accuracy in relation to reality
• Thus, being more specialised, exact and organised, scientific knowledge is
closer to reality than ordinary knowledge
• The subject matter and methodology must both be considered in
distinguishing scientific knowledge from non-scientific knowledge (such as
 Nature of Scientific Knowledge
• Scientific knowledge is organised knowledge arrived at through the
application of scientific methodologies and methods
• The nature of scientific knowledge is therefore that it is verifiable, objective
and universal
• However, being verifiable, objective and universal does not mean that
scientific knowledge is certain reality or is absolute reality, but rather that it
is probable reality
• Consequently, scientific knowledge is dynamic and self-correcting as newer
scientific knowledge emerges or existing knowledge is re-analysed
 Theories on the Status of Scientific Knowledge
• Four theories on the status of scientific knowledge are:
1. Complete Phenomenalism - According to this theory a phenomena that is
observed becomes reality. Consequently, scientific knowledge is
concerned with the identification, classification and establishment of
relations in phenomena
2. Fictionalism Theory - This theory is as a result of crises that often arises in
sciences due to existence of many explanations or competing solutions to
a particular problem and if these are not conclusively resolved so as to
arrive at a single explanation or solution, all the competing knowledge
solutions are deemed to be fictitious or are fictions
3. Skepticism Theory - According to this theory all scientific knowledge are
simply instruments devised by researchers to satisfy their vested interests
and as such knowledge is neither true nor false; meaning that it does not
matter whether knowledge is scientific or otherwise as long as it is
knowledge; Due to its emphasis on instruments used, the theory of
skepticism is also known as instrumentalism
Different Approaches for Acquiring Knowledge
• Is science the only way to acquire knowledge? NO!
• Alternative modes of knowledge acquisition are:
• On your own (from parents, other people, experience, society,
books, media, & common sense)
• Authoritarian mode (qualified people) – quick, economical but
can overestimate, misuse
• Tradition – special case of authority – the way things have always
been – beliefs
• Mystical mode – supernaturally knowledgeable authorities
prophets, divines, gods, etc – ritualistic
• Rationalistic mode – knowledge can be acquired by strict
adherence to rules of logic

12
 Types of Sciences
• There are two types of Sciences:
– Natural Science is a branch of science that attempts to explain
and predict natural phenomena based on empirical evidence;
In natural science research, hypothesis are scientifically tested
or verified and these end up as scientific theories
– Social Science is a branch of science concerned with society
and the relationships among individuals within a society

Historical Perspective on Acquisition of Knowledge

Acquisition of Knowledge in Natural Science
• Historically, the natural sciences were the first ones to apply
controlled experiments and objective observations premised on
the following natural science principles and assumption, to
uncover knowledge:

13
 Assumptions and Principles of Natural Science
• Assumptions natural science are historically based on the
philosophy of positivism and principles of determinism,
empiricism, parsimony, and generality
1. Determinism means that events are caused by other
circumstances; and hence, understanding such casual links are
necessary for prediction and control
2. Empiricism means collection of verifiable empirical evidences in
support of theories or hypotheses
3. Parsimony refers to the explanation of the phenomena in the
most economic way possible
4. Generality is the process of generalizing the observation of the
particular phenomenon to the world at large
Historical Acquisition of Knowledge in Social Science
• Unlike natural science, historically and through the Middle Ages
social science ignored positivism and instead relied on metaphysics
(mysticism and superstition) procedures in acquiring knowledge
 Basic Building Blocks of Enquiry for Scientific Knowledge
• The following are the basic chronological building blocks and
steps followed in acquiring scientific knowledge in both natural
and social sciences:

1. Ontology – What is out there to know?

2. Epistemology – What and how can we know about what we
want know out there?
3. Methodology – How do we go about acquiring scientific
knowledge on what is out there to know?
4. Methods – Which precise procedures, instruments and tools
are we to use in acquiring scientific knowledge?
5. Sources – Given the available procedures, instruments and
tool, which data sources should we harness to enable us
acquire scientific knowledge?
 1. Ontology
• Ontology is the starting point for acquiring scientific knowledge
• Ontology is the study of the nature of being, becoming, existence or
reality including the categories of being and their relationships
• Ontology are those judgments and beliefs and their claims and
assumptions made by human beings about the nature of scientific
knowledge
• These claims and assumptions are about what exists, what that which
exists looks like, what units make up that which exists, their categories
and how the units that make up that which exists interact with one
another
• An individual’s ontology is what one judges or believes to be the nature
of scientific knowledge and therefore worth researching upon
• Ontological positions are contained within a researchers perspectives
with regard to their ‘objectivism’, subjectivism, ‘constructivism’,
‘criticism’, etc; these will soon be discussed and made clearer
• Ontological position informs the general interest area and manner for
undertaking research work
 2. Epistemology
• After dealing with ontology, logically follows epistemology
• Epistemology is derived from the Greek words espiste meaning
knowledge and logos meaning reason
• Thus epistemology simply means reasoned logic
• comprises issues of logic and the methodology of acquiring knowledge
in social science
• Epistemology is concerned with issues of:
1. How what is assumed to exist can be known
2. Focuses the processes of gathering knowledge
3. Explores ways of discovering scientific knowledge and these are
not static but forever keep changing
4. Addresses issues of theory of scientific knowledge especially with
regard to methodologies, possible ways of gaining scientific
knowledge and validation of this scientific knowledge
 Assumptions in Epistemology

• Epistemology makes the following assumptions on scientific knowledge:

1. That nature is orderly - There is recognisable, regularity, and order in the

natural world and occurrences of phenomena, i.e.. events do not just occur
randomly and that nature encompass all empirically observable objects
including human behaviours and responses
2. We can know nature – natural, individuals and social phenomena exhibit
sufficient recurrent, orderly and empirically demonstrable patterns to be
amenable to scientific investigation (research) which the human mind is
capable of knowing
3. All natural phenomena have natural causes - Until scientists or
researchers are able to explain the cause of occurrence of a natural or
social phenomenon, they must reject any other explanation including the
argument that the phenomena is due to a supernatural cause
4. Nothing is self evident - Scientific knowledge is not self evident and that
any claims of something not being false must be demonstrated mainly
objectively or otherwise methodically through subjectivity, constructivism,
etc
5. Scientific knowledge is derived from acquisition of experience - If scientific
knowledge is to help us understand the reality in world, it must be empirical
and it must rely on the perceptions, experiences, observations and
communications of others and the wider scientific knowledge-community
6. Scientific knowledge is superior to ignorance - Scientific knowledge must
be pursued both for its own sake (enlightenment), and for the sake of
improving the conditions of humankind.
 Ontology Versus Epistemology Positions of a Researcher

• Though addressing almost same issues in the acquisition of scientific

knowledge, the following can be said about ontology and epistemology:
1. If ontology is about what we may know, then epistemology is about how we
come to know what we know
2. An ontological or/and epistemological position adopted by a researcher
may lead to different views on the same phenomena or occurrence
 Epistemological Paradigms
Definition of a Paradigm
• A paradigm is a model or framework derived from a
worldview with reference to the judgements and beliefs held
by a researcher or a community of researchers about the
nature of scientific knowledge and its existence
• Paradigms are shared by a scientific community and guide
how a community of researchers act with regard to scientific
inquiry
• Simply put, paradigms are lenses through which researchers
view the world and its perceptions of judgements and beliefs
• Thus a paradigm being lens through which a researcher views
the world, presuppositions and therefore scientific
knowledge, is a determinant of the methodology adopted in
conducting scientific research
 Competing Epistemological Paradigms

• In scientific research, there are two basic competing epistemological

paradigms, namely; Positivism and Post-Positivism (or Interprevitism)

1. Evolution of the Positivism Paradigm

• The positivism paradigm in scientific social research began with the works
of Auguste Comte (1798-1857), a French philosopher who is credited as its
father and who introduced sociologie which was interpreted as social
physics; (social physics left all speculative ideas and approaches of
metaphysics and followed the positivism example of natural science
• Comte argued that although discovery of knowledge social science is
principally dependent on the experience of human senses, knowledge is
obtained by experimentation, observation and logical reasoning premised
on the principles and assumptions of natural science
• The outcomes of such scientific social research just as in natural science
research, are subject to revision or modification as new evidence is
uncovered or found
Profound Contribution of Comte to Scientific Social Enquiry

• A profound contribution of Augustine Comte to scientific social enquiry was

influencing that that knowledge in social science is better uncovered
through conducting tightly controlled experiments and observations based
on the principles and assumptions of natural science enquiry and which
enquiry is conducted by an objective rather than subjective researcher to
arrive at social scientific knowledge upon which generalisations and
predictions could be based
• Due to its perceived integrity, social science researchers throughout 1800’s
and up to date, embrace Comte’s ground breaking idea of embracing the
positivism of natural science enquiry as an intelligent alternative to the
mysticism and superstition (metaphysics) whose techniques had existed
since the Middle Ages
• Thus up to the present era, positivism is routinely the prevailing paradigm
of social science enquiry with other competing approaches considered
inferior or less credible
 Current State and Influence of the Positivism Paradigm in
Social Science Research
• Positivism is where many of us to day exist most of our lifetimes, e.g. this
world is real; the the chair that I am sitting on is solid; that my research
results are statistically significant, etc.
• A positivist researcher is objective and strives to exclude possible social
biases by not taking into account any subjective feelings
• To a positivist, findings are not false when a researcher exists apart from
his/her acquired data, with optimum research results (due applying rigour)
being quantitative or quantifiable
• When a positivist conducts social science research, he or she is more
concerned with the quantitative representativeness of the research findings,
typically ‘what percentage of people in Lusaka responded as liking (or being
satisfied) with a service being provided’, or what is the exact number
households who are hungry in Zambia, etc
• Use of statistics in form of statistical methodologies, data collection methods
and analysis techniques as presently used in social science research are
part of the positivists approach to social science enquiry
 2. Emergence the Post Positivism Paradigm
(or Interprevitism)

• Although the positivistic paradigm continued to influence social science

research for a long time and still does so, in the later half of the 20 th
Century the paradigm came under increasing criticism due to its lack of
regard for the subjective in-put of the individual social science researcher
• Inclusion of the subjective in put of the individual social science
researcher in objective oriented (or positivist) social research is called
post positivism
• Fundamentally, post positivism assumes that human behaviour and
social interactions are not totally passive, controlled and determined by
external environments; and as such human beings and their interactions
in nature are dehumanised or debased if their intentions, individualism
and freedoms are not taken into account when researching and
interpreting scientific knowledge in social sciences
• The Chicago School of Sociology is often credited with bringing
legitimacy to the Post Positivism (or Interprevitist) paradigm starting in
the early 1900’s
• Thus, proponents of the post-positivism paradigm contend that objectivity
as enunciated by the positivism approach in social science research need
to be augmented with the subjectivity of the researcher; thereby effectively
giving birth and rise to the post positivism paradigm
• The post positivist paradigm is based on a philosophy that scientific
knowledge in social science is also subjective and that this knowledge may
be constructed reality by the researcher
• Social science researchers using the post positivist paradigm, subjectively
seek to explore, describe, illuminate and understand complex human
relations and abstract constructs
• Although social science theories are constructed and generally tested
using the objectivity of natural science, post positivists believe that the
scientific knowledge obtained can further illuminated through a
researchers’ in-depth interpretation of the data at hand
• Undoubtedly, there is acknowledgement of inherent bias when conducting
post positivist (or interpretive) social science research
 Nature and Acquisition of Post Positivism Scientific
Knowledge

• The nature of post positivism emphasises that social scientific knowledge as

uncovered and interpreted by an individual researcher is personally
experienced rather than acquired from or imposed from outside
• Post positivists believe that observation of social phenomena and
interpretations thereof comprising scientific knowledge are best described
rather than quantified
• Consequently, post positivist research and resultant findings are principally
qualitative (or descriptive)
 Growing Acceptance of Post Positivism and its Resulting
Influence

• As the post positivist paradigm earned greater acceptance and legitimacy

among social science researchers, many hybrid qualitative sub paradigms
of post positivism came into being or gained ground
• Two of these and worth examining in this course are the Constructivist sub-
paradigm and Critical Theory sub-paradigm
 1. The Constructivism Sub-Paradigm
• Constructivism Paradigm posits that scientific knowledge in social
science is uncovered and interpreted by the individual researcher
according to the their social, ideological or other dispositions or
inclinations that they possess
• The Constructivism paradigm goes beyond classical post positivism by
contending that social reality is partly objective and subjective but
additionally is experiential, e.g. ‘that a thing over there that looks like a
table to me is actually being used as a chair by someone else’
• Thus, in constructivism someone's construction of reality might be shared
with many other people, but also that many other people could construct
the same perceived scientific reality in quite a different way
• More often than not, research topic involving religious and political topics
fall in the constructivist realm, as these mass appealing topics routinely
have conflicting explanations for like realities
• In religion and politics, knowledge is not absolute (or totally objective and
subjective) but often that the one conducting research and therefore
determiner of the epistemology view is not practically detached from the
system but instead immersed in the process
• Therefore, although the constructivist approach to scientific social
science research may appear holistic, research findings are often
idiosyncratic (or personalistic) rather than detached and generalisable
• Principally the goals for conducting constructivist research is to enable
the understanding of and the structuring of a system, rather than that of
making predictions on which to premise generalisations
• As already presupposed, qualitative research mostly leans towards
constructivism
 2. The Critical Theory Sub Paradigm
• In contract, critical theory is all about values, or more precisely, about
power and political relations and struggles
• Critical theory is concerned with power relations and patterns of
dominance
• Critical theory is a paradigm that looks at the world through a political
lens, in which certain groups such as rich people, powerful segments of
society, politicians, advantaged groups, private capital, capitalism in
general exert their power and influences over other less advantaged
groups
• The goal of critical theory is understanding scientific factors and basis for
the emancipation of the oppressed or lesser advantaged in society
 Nature of Critical Theory Approach

• Regarding research methods employed, critical theorists use historical,

situational, contextual analysis following conduct of qualitative research for
collecting background data and information
• Qualitative research typically interviews conducted by critical theorists are
often quite interesting in most cases as the researcher is over all critical to
say the least whilst writing up the findings of the research, rather than when
conducting the interview or recording data!
• For example critical theory is more often employed by social equality
activists, journalists, and social media networks segments of social scientist
who tend to be overly critical while writing up their ‘analytical stories or news
or reports’ rather than when conducting interviews to gather data or
information
• Since the focus is on power distributions and inter-group struggles in
society, critical theory is sometimes described as neo-Marxist theory
 (Some) Initial Reasons for Condemning Critical Theory
• Due to its focus on power relations, inter-group struggles and leanings
towards neo-Marxist theory, most students (presumably even in this
course) initially may disparage the theory, remarking that:
– This GES5881 course is pure rubbish, as we are not here to waste our
time learning the senseless politics of critical theory
– We are here to gain meaningful knowledge on how people work, so that
when we go back to our organisations and companies we can apply
such useful knowledge in better managing our personnel
– This just useless theory; how on earth can any learned person take it
seriously?; and more importantly, how can anyone make a living being a
researcher let alone a consultant who depends on critical theory?
• Please hold your fire and wait; for just a second!!!!!!
 Why We All Must Love Use of Critical Theory
• We must all love the critical theory at times as it helps us in examining of the
many assumptions, perceptions and power relations ever present in our
homes, communities, organisations, and countries
• Examples in organisational and cooperate circles are that:
– One can analyse ways in which senior management in an organisation
represents certain kinds of policy meanings; e.g. career progression and
remuneration for top-management versus the same for ordinary workers
in the organisation
– One can create new concepts on the role of ‘highly emotionally-deposed
people’ employed or deployed in customer relations ( or public relation)
departments
– One can analyse the problematic issue of an organisations’ engagement
with the public with regard to whether it is meaningful to assume that
productive public engagement should be free of organisational or other
values?
– One can examine claims by certain segments of Zambian society as to
whether tribalism is being practiced in Zambia or is it mere inter interests
groups nepotism at play ?
– In market research, one can analyse the Global Corporations’ attempts
to structure the meaning of Zambian brands and the Zambian
consumer resistance to such meanings (attempts by Lafarge Zambia
to obliterate the Chilanga Cement brand, or Zambia Breweries-SAB
Miller manoeuvres to get rid of the Mosi brand, etc.)
– In ICTs research one can look at the utility of Twitter, Facebook,
Whatsup and many other social media and networking platforms, as to
who profits from them?, what actions do these systems permit or
forbid? what influences do these systems exert on Zambian users,
morality, governance structures and society?
Summary on the Positivism and Post Positivism Epistemology

• Currently, key epistemological positions are those approaches

and claims in scientific inquiry found within the perspectives of
‘positivism’ and ‘post positivism’

• Positivisms is an epistemological position that advocates the

application of the principles and assumptions of natural science to the
study of social reality and beyond and is grounded empiricism and
quantitative approaches

• Post Positivism (or Interpretivism) is an epistemological position

premised on the view that a different research strategy or approach is
required in social science research if to understand the subjective
meaning of social action because there are differences between
human beings and objects of the natural sciences and is grounded
subjective observations and qualitative approaches
 Implication of Choosing an Epistemological Position
• Choosing one of the epistemological positions positivisms or post positivism
leads to employing a different methodology in scientific research
• In a scientific research process, Ontology precedes Epistemology which
logically precedes Methodology
• Thus, a scientific researcher clearly sets out the interrelationship between
what can be researched (ontological position) to what can be know about
it (epistemological position) and then how to go about acquiring it
(methodological approach)
• Despite choosing a primary epistemological position, all scientific
research comprises a mix of both positivism and post positivism in
varying degrees and depending on the stage in the research process.

• Examples are when:

1. Conducting literature review, framing conceptual or theoretical frameworks,
discussing and concluding – a researcher operates mostly in the post
positivist realm or qualitatively
2. Collecting data, collating data, itemising data, analysing data and making
predictions – a researcher a researcher operates mostly in the positivist
realm or quantitatively
 Methodology and Its Importance in Scientific Research
• Whereas, epistemology involves the philosophy of how we come to know
the world, methodology involves the process and practices involved in
knowing what we want to know
• Sciences and scientific knowledge places great emphasis on methodology
rather than on results or outcomes; this is so because once an appropriate
methodology is adopted as informed by ontological and subsequently
epistemological positions, uncovering of scientific knowledge follows
naturally
• Thus the methodology adopted is relative to the epistemology and the
nature of scientific knowledge that is to be uncovered
• A methodology focuses on the specific ways that we can use in trying to
understand nature or a phenomena
• Thus a methodology is required as it establishes consistency of approach
and thought in scientific inquiry
• A methodology is a way, and as such it naturally points to the methods,
techniques and tools to be used in uncovering scientific knowledge
• Methods, techniques and tools determine the sources from which data is to
be collected from
• Note that methods, techniques and tools are not ends in
themselves but are necessary in the process of comprehending
and interpretation of the research problem Research direction –
ontology, epistemology, methodology, methods and sources
 Methodology is Different from Method
• A methodology is different from a method as a methodology represents
the choice of approach in research and determines methods to be used
• A method comprises procedures, techniques and tools as determined by
the methodology and points to sources of data and as such a method is
used to identify, collect, collate and analyse and interpret data
• Generally:
• A methodology is directly linked to ontology and epistemology and
therefore the research problem is concerned with logic, potentialities
and limitations of the research methods used
• A method is derived from a methodology and is directly linked to
research questions
 Basic Building Blocks of Inquiry for Scientific
Knowledge

• The following are the basic chronological building blocks and steps
followed in acquiring scientific knowledge in both natural and social
sciences:

1. Ontology – What is out there to know?

2. Epistemology – What and how can we know about what we want know
out there?
3. Methodology – How do we go about acquiring scientific knowledge on
what is out there to know?
4. Methods – Which precise procedures, instruments and tools are we to
use in acquiring scientific knowledge?
5. Sources – Which data sources should we harness to enable us acquire
scientific knowledge?