Psychology Chronologically Ordered Entries

Question :

A diary format consisting of chronologically-ordered entries explain how these images illustrate the reflection process.

Answer :

There are various significant things that I was able to learn from the course. This module helped me to think critically and my perspectives about the events in life changed. I realized that the problem that we face is often constructed by us as well as the options associated with the problem. This module helped me understand innovative theories which were not considered earlier. This reflective review assignment has been written by me on 4th August. Till this date, the total confirmed deaths due to COVID-19 all over the world is 694,713, which is an increase of about 40,000 from the last week (Ji et al. 2020).  This reflective assignment includes views about critical thinking, philosophy of science, religion and science, why nothing/something, metaphysics, what is known and how it is known, and the focus on transforming the methods to know. This pandemic is a big issue and very tragic. However, ironically, this lockdown contained its disadvantages and advantages. I am confined within the four walls of my home and I often wonder, “If this era of Coronavirus is considered like an experiment, then what are the things we question regarding our understanding of what is the meaning to be a human?  How the human endeavor might be pursued by us which consists of myriad acts that surrounds our wish of knowing and reimagining the world and ourselves in which we are living?

Unlike doctors, the scientists are not required to choose issues as they urgently require the solution. The increase in paradigm shifts happens when the dominant paradigm under which the operation of normal science is rendered incompatible with new process and discovery to facilitate the acceptance of new paradigm and theory (Dryhurst et al. 2020). The term has been applied to science by Thomas Kuhn, a physicist, but now such description is applied to every established system, and it does not matter whether it is socio-economic, governmental, and scientific or a new way to think. The technologies and tools in this 21st century, that can do miracles make us feel powerful and invincible, are defenseless in front of COVID-19. We only have the primitive weapons which are masks made out of cloth and social-distance. 

In the 20th century, Thomas Kuhn was a very influential science historian. He has a huge impact on every academic area. Thomas Kuhn, in the mid-1990s, was considered as the philosopher in Science and in the book named “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions” he argued that an objective and absolute truth can never be achieved by the science. The reality is not known and it will be hidden forever behind our definitions, preconceptions and assumptions. The fact is that the method of our thinking towards the most organized trail of mankind of understanding the universe has been changed single handedly by him. The impact of Thomas Kuhn’s philosohpy has in every field of academy. In the field of science, the themes of Kuhnian are particularly noticed in the research of conceptual change, debate about multicultural education and constructivist theory (Görlich and Stein-Zalai 2020). The lesson that should be learnt include community of science education must be very serious and effectively with the continuing debates and analyzing history along with philosophy in science. This lesson is same as was learnt by education community of science’s embracing the logical empiricism in the 1950s and 1960s. The statement by him which is developed by science or inside paradigm determined historically was largely praised by anthropologists and sociologists and eminent epidemiologists was influenced by him. Various paradigms are there which are incommensurable, that is an adjective through which Kuhn meant that when the scientists observes the whole world from various perspectives, the contradictions of them would not be resolved by experiment or discussion. This is what has been argued by Kuhn, but I was unsure due to his writings that were very murky. It must be asked by us whether the theory of germs is one the paradigms of Kuhnian. From the perspective of Kuhn, this pandemic has raised much science which does not have epistemological but historical justification (Fortaleza 2020). 

The whole life of Karl Popper (1902 to 1994) has been dedicated for exploring what is known as “two main problems in the theory of knowledge.” Problem of induction is the first problem which is explained by David Hume (1711-1776) stating that regardless of the observations of “A” as well as “B”, a casual relation is always going to be psychological instead of a logical conclusion. Problem of demarcation is the second that is the requirement of clear boundary or rule between the things that are scientific and that are not. Popper agreed with Hume proposing that scientists must be creative to imagine theories and of only being rigorous to test the theories both empirically and rationally. Every theory would be able to survive while resisting refutations based on empirical. The feel of scientific way has been summed up by Popper in his book titled Conjectures and refutations. As per Popper, distinguishing the true scientists were done by their trial for refuting instead of confirming the theories. And still it was suggested by the version of Kuhn that the final thing scientists generally seek of doing is refuting the theories present in the paradigm. 

Coherently, science can be explained due to the feasibility of falsification empirically. How such things can be applied for the scientists fighting against COVID-19? According to the perspective of Popper, a chain of critical researchers mutually can strengthen public response. While criticism and theoretical discussion cannot go on and be paralyzed when we are counting the people who are dying, the scientists may have the preparation for endorsing changes in the policies of public when any theory has been refuted and along with the studies for novel quite ample plans. The statement of “anything goes” by Paul Feyrabend (1924-1994) is of the greatest concern from his popular book “Against Method”, as well as the criticism regarding the achievements on modern medication in the after works. Having same direction, the skeptical argument by philosopher of New York Peter Unger called “nothing can ever be really known” refers the best useless hypothesis, within this worst situation quite dangerous is spreading all over the opinion of the public. 

Finally, Imre Lakatos’s has provided an interesting method from the epistemological puzzle focusing on “programs of Scientific Investigation.” The attempt of Lakatos was reconciling the ideas of Kuhn and Popper with the productive dialogue he had with Feyerabend. The chain of criticism mutually was imagined briefly by Lakatos in rivalry. Such programs have pros over the other. Some historicity has been admitted by him for balancing between them. Yet, he stands fiercely for the criteria of demarcation of science. It must be assumed that there is progression in epidemiological-virological programs and must not be heard by the officials of the government, but should be provided with many expression in the journals of science (Tang, Comish and Kang 2020). 

It brings the last discussion. The basis of continuous criticism by Lakatos and Popper has been provided by peer-review. Editing procedure as well as peer-review consumes time that is not available in the present pandemics. Many of the studies either are published within pre-print repositories or are submitted in peer-review fast track. It means to lose the critical parameters, a selection of speed instead of rigor. The trend is fully according to the predicted privileges of Lakatos for programs progressively. More than that, even though it is argued that there is hardly anything like valuing neutral science, our research should be moved away from corporate and political interests. Hence, in this period of extremism, science can be the pillar to democracy along with a movement for protecting life. 

It can be concluded that Coronavirus creates a paradigm shift by which all systems are realigned in all industry all over the world at once instantly. Perhaps, criticism is considered as the valuable principle of practice and thinking scientifically. With the submission of the role by science for COVID-19 to scrutiny of high critics of mainstream science, the human values of the activities of research are reinforced by us. According to my perspective, the main point is that we can be having an innovative interpretation regarding science and its meaning. However, the main idea of science is to make us understand the universe in a better way. It is impossible to go far from the restricting belief that it is not possible to view science by a new perspective. It is possible to have an innovative interpretation philosophically which can be spiritual on consoling us. 

References

Görlich, D. and Stein-Zalai, J., 2020. Reinvigorating multilateral cooperation during the COVID-19 crisis: Opportunities and difficulties. KIELER BEITRÄGE ZUR, p.81.

Ji, Y., Ma, Z., Peppelenbosch, M.P. and Pan, Q., 2020. Potential association between COVID-19