Abel Chapter 10

1. How does Science explain a fact? Please use the entire explanation on. p. 91 and 92.

Science explains a fact ideally by embedding it in a general law from which, along with particular conditions involved, the fact to be explained may be logically deduced. In explanation a particular fact is explained by being comprehended under, and derived from a general law. The scientist explains what happens by devising concepts to describe particular experiences and by supplying a framework for covering laws from which, in conjunction with the specific conditions involved, we may make inferences about what it is that we want to have explained.

2. What are some common misconceptions about scientific explanations? How does Abel refute each one?

Science describes rather than explains. However there is a fine line between description and explanation because if scientific explanations are only descriptions then what would be their explanations? Science explains the strange by the familiar. However it is usually the opposite case because most familiar phenomena like illness are explained by unfamiliar concepts like complicated diseases. Scientific explanation is not the same as understanding in the sense in which it is said. However this understanding is more like knowledge by acquaintance. Scientific explanations need not be casual laws. It may be a law of simultaneous existence rather than of succession.

3. What does Abel mean when he says: "a law in turn may be explained by another law of wider scope; the greater the generality, the better the explanation." (p. 93)?

He means that some laws require more explanation which more general laws on the topic can provide.

4. What does Abel mean when he says: "Explanation is always relative to a given knowledge situation; you must stop somewhere." (p. 94)?

Humans are limited to the amount of knowledge they can acquire and therefore they can only explain as much as they know.

5. Why are explanatory reductions "economical ways of describing phenomena." (p. 95)?

This is because they are not ontological and do not eliminate processes or events from the world.

6. Why does scientific explanation require the concept of system?

Because to be thought of as a machine would mean it is the sum of all its parts but in fact it is really a whole concept which determines the operation of its parts.

7. Why is the theory of emergence used to explain how anything new came into the world? What counter-claim does Abel provide?

It is used to do this in order to remedy the inability of metaphysics of mechanism to do the same task. Abel claims that just because we cannot predict the properties of these things at a given point in time with our lack of knowledge does not mean they can never be predicted.

8. Why is theory and observation interdependent in scientific explanations?

This is because observation can be used to explain and create a theory and a theory can be used to explain a possible theoretical observation even when it can never actually be observed.

9. Why is explanation in science theoretically identical to prediction? How does Abel feel about this?

This is because an explanation can only be considered right if it can accurately predict future phenomena. Abel says that this is not always true however, because it can be explained that one phenomenon was caused by something but you cannot know for sure if it will cause it again or if something else may cause the same thing again.

10. What does Abel mean when he says: 'The growth of science is not a clear-cut, straightforward progression toward a unique, all-inclusive final truth." (p. 100)?

He means that many unexpected and out-of-place factors can effect and cloud the progression.

11. According to Abel, what situations are seen by scientists as requiring explanation?

Situations that do not have any obvious explanation to begin with in context of the time period and society the scientist is in. For example, more religious scientists don’t need an explanation for the beginning of the world.

12. What is the role of the human element in the progress of scientific explanation?

Science has no guiding rules and therefore humans must make their own paths to their theories and it can therefore be different for different humans.

13. Abel claims that: "Our perceptual knowledge is delimited by our characteristic biological capacities, and there are limits to the completeness of our theoretical structures. But our observations and our theories mutually reinforce each other....The structure of our science is pragmatically justified; it is the most reliable knowledge there is." (p. 105) Does this hold true in History as well?

Yes because history is created through the comparison of memories and documents that must mutually support each other in order to become historical fact. Therefore it is the most reliable knowledge we have about events we can never be entirely sure of.

14. In Bullet form, and using information from this chapter and Chapter 15 (you wrote Study Questions on November 9), please list the similarities and differences between Scientific and Historical explanations.

• Science can explain specific laws with more general laws and history can explain the purpose of a specific event happening with the explanation of a larger event that affected it.
• The reliance of both scientific and historical explanation is constantly being questioned.
• Science is explained through present observations but history is explained through past memories.
• Humans affect the process of both scientific and historical explanations.
• Science is often explained through the concept of a system but in history, individual events must add up to the larger event or it is not considered logical.
• Neither scientific nor historical explanations can always predict the future.
• Both science and history are explained through mutually agreeable information that is gained about an event or phenomenon.

Brave New World Chapter 13

1. What does Lenina mean when she says, "For Ford's sake John, talk sense. I can't understand a word you say. First it is vacuum cleaners; then its knots. You're driving me crazy." (p. 191)?
She means she does not have the capability to comprehend John’s poetry about love and marriage and it is in complete contradiction with her hypnopaedia.

2. How does John react when Lenina makes advances towards him?
He tries to disengage from her advances because they remind him of the pron movie he had seen.

Brave New World Chapter 12

1. In what ways does Bernard remind you of Dr. Treves or the nightwatchman in The Elephant Man?
He reminds me of these other men because he is using John and putting him on display for his own benefit.

2. Why does John have to use Zuni to express how he feels?
This is because there are no words in the English language that could thoroughly express his anger.

3. Why does Lenina feel "a sense of dreadful emptiness, a breathless apprehension, a nausea." (p. 174)?
She feels this way because she is beginning to realize how different John truly is and she is beginning to love him for it but she thinks he hates her.

4. Why doesn't Mustapaha Mond want "A New theory of Biology" not to be published? Does the work remind you of anything that we have studied recently?
He thinks its content could decondition some of the people in the higher classes because it has idea about what the Biology of humans is really about. This reminds me of when the book about Intelligent Design was trying to publish.

5. Do you agree with Bernard's belief in the "principal functions of a friend" as described on p. 179? Why does he feel this way toward John and Helmholtz?
I agree that a friend should be there for you even when you are too blinded by anger to think of how you are treating them, but I also think that if someone is treating their friend bad enough the friend has every right to walk away from the friendship. He feels this way because John and Helmholtz are his only true friends and they are the people who are receiving most of his aggression.

6. What does Helmholtz think of Shakespeare?
He thinks Shakespeare’s work is incredible and would make excellent propaganda, but he cannot help but find the situation of the characters to be humorous.

Brave New World Chapter 11

1. Why is Dr. Shaw glad "to have had this opportunity to see an example of senility in a human being." (p. 155)?

This is because he had put Linda on a permanent supply of somma so she could be on holiday for eternity without any work to do.

2. Why are people saying behind Bernard's back that, "He won't find another Savage to help him out a second time." (p. 157)?
This is because he was able to escape being exiled to Iceland by embarrassing the Director with the revelation of his son the savage and the women he had impregnated.

3. Why do the Eton students in the Beta-Minus Geography room laugh at the religious activities of "savages"? Why do you think it significant that there are no twins at Eton? Do you think that is still true today?
They laugh because it is so ridiculous to them because they believe that Ford is their one and only leader. I think it is significant that there are no twins because it shows how this place is strictly for upper-class members. I do not think this would still be true today because I think it would be more accepting of other classes.

4. How do children in the World State learn about Death?
They learn to take it as a matter of course.

5. Why do lower-caste workers receive daily Soma rations? Do we do this today?
They have rations because they have the most amount of work to do and cannot waste time on somma, also it is a way of controlling them more affectively. We have rations for food in some places today for lower casts which is similar because it is another way to control them.

6. Why does John tell Lenina that, "I don't think you ought to see things like that." (p. 169)?
He thinks the film was immoral and inappropriate and he was not used to the blunt sexuality and the effect it had on him.

Brave New World Chapter 10

1. Why does the director feel that Unorthodoxy is worse than Murder? What does the Director want to do with Bernard Marx?
He claims that murder only affects the individual but that unorthodoxy affects the core of society which is more valuable than an individual. He wants to send Bernard to Iceland so that he cannot affect anyone with his unorthodoxy.

2. What surprise does Bernard bring to the Director?
He brings Linda and John to see the Director.

Title 10 Outline

Intro: When it comes to these areas of knowing, the natural and social sciences and history, there are many similarities and differences between the way we use each area for the purpose of explaining things.

I. Both the sciences and history use reasoning but in two different ways.
- When explaining the natural and social sciences we use induction.
- The Scientific Method

II. When explaining history we use deduction.
- The Cheques Lab

III. There are other differences as well
- When explaining the natural and social sciences we rely heavily on perception.
- The Stanford Prison Experiment.

IV. When explaining history we use knowledge by authority.
- Japanese Revisionist History

V. Counterclaims
- Science and history use the same means of explanation because both use facts to explain a situation.
- But not true because neither really has facts and they clearly work in different ways as shown.

VI. Limitations: Abusing the methods of explanation.
- Sciences
- Climategate/ Intelligent Design/ What the Bleep do we Know?
- History
- Japanese Revisionist History/ Big Brother’s Photoshop

VII. Implications
- Science
- If our perception is false then our conclusion is false.
- We can never prove anything.
- History
- Relying on second-hand experience has its limitations.
- We can never prove what actually happened.