=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-3037/paper13
|storemode=property
|title=Logical Positivism and its Contributions to Science Teachers Education
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3037/paper13.pdf
|volume=Vol-3037
|authors=Marco Aurélio Clemente Gonçalves,Agustin Adúriz-Bravo
}}
==Logical Positivism and its Contributions to Science Teachers Education==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3037/paper13.pdf
Logical Positivism and its Contributions to Science Teachers
Education
Marco Aurélio Clemente Gonçalves1 and Agustin Adúriz-Bravo2
1
Universidad Nacional de Tres de Febrero - UNTreF, Centro Cultural Borges (3º Piso, Pabellón III)
Buenos Aires, F.D., Argentina, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
2
Instituto de Investigaciones Centro de Formación e Investigación en Enseñanza de las
Ciencias – CeFIEC, Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Av. Int. Cantilo,
Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Abstract
The present work sought, through bibliographical research, to present questions about assertive
or counterproductive aspects from the point of view of Logical Positivism’s legacy for aspects
consistent with the initial and continuing education of future science teachers in the interior of
Bahia, Brazil. Such notes have as background arguments about a quality scientific education
under the watchful eye of meta-scientific contents, such as epistemology, history of science,
and sociology of science, present or not in their respective training. However, under many
severe criticisms, we can still enter this universe and present nuances of this period (logical
positivism) for a quality epistemological debate with today’s students.
Keywords 1
Logical Positivism; Teacher Training, Scientific Education, Epistemology.
1. Introduction
The present work sought, through bibliographical research, that is, conceived from previously
published documents (such as articles or books), to present questions about assertive or
counterproductive aspects from the point of view of Logical Positivism’s legacy for aspects consistent
with initial and continuing education of future science teachers in the interior of Bahia, Brazil.
This notoriety that lends itself to the function of epistemology for the teaching of science comes
with its most outstanding attribute, the reflection on debates about the processes of scientific knowledge
and its justification, which is why it is so important. Logical positivism was the first institutionalized
epistemological program with Moritz Schlick and the Vienna Circle.
For that, bibliographic research is used here, which is “developed on the basis of material already
prepared, consisting mainly of books and scientific articles” (GIL, 2002) [1].
The adopted methodology seeks to answer two guiding questions: What are the recent and current
most significant epistemological trends (since the 20th century), and how can we communicate them to
science teachers? What specific epistemological productions can be of the highest value for the
teachers’ training?
From this, a cut of the state of the art type is made concerning Epistemology and its function, whether
as a grounded and institutionalized knowledge or as a metascience that takes care of dealing with
another science, as suggested by KLIMOVSKY (1994) [2]. Science has its object to be studied, and,
analogously, epistemology is the science that deals with science. Epistemology is the science that
studies the foundations and methods of scientific knowledge.
CISETC 2021: International Congress on Educational and Technology in Sciences, November 16-18, 2021, Chiclayo, Peru
EMAIL: marco.clementegoncalves@gmail.com (A. 1); aadurizbravo@cefiec.fcen.uba.ar (A. 2);
ORCID: 0000-0001-5630-2209 (A. 1); 0000-0002-8200-777X (A. 2)
© 2020 Copyright for this paper by its authors.
Use permitted under Creative Commons License Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
CEUR Workshop Proceedings (CEUR-WS.org)
It is undeniable that the significant impacts caused by logical positivists, whether in the way of
thinking or doing science, bring to the present certain nuances in form and method. One of these
examples is reported by Verhaegh (2020) [3], especially what happened in American society, with an
internal approach that affects the way that American philosophers came to perceive logical positivism.
It is worth noting, according to ADÚRIZ-BRAVO et al. (2006) [4], epistemology can be considered
a somewhat young academic discipline. However, since the time of Aristotle, philosophers and
scientists have already occupied themselves with reflecting on science.
There are several ways to start such an analysis. In the present work, we chose to undertake a broad
path to address pro and contrary factors of Logical Positivism and Inherited Conception to the training
of science teachers, especially those in initial training in the context of Nature Sciences Course held in
Senhor do Bonfim and continuing education that takes place in Juazeiro, both in the interior of Bahia.
2. Development
2.1. Logical Positivism and Inherited Conception
According to Demos (1953) [5], for example, all enchantment of positivism resides in its clarity,
which is something demanded by human beings, and within logical positivism, for him, the rules of
scientific procedure are unambiguous and well defined.
The core of Logical Positivism was to suppress all assertions of metaphysical content from what
was considered scientific discourse at the time. In such a way, a statement only makes sense if it is
essentially formal (basically, mathematical and logical) or subject to empirical verification.
Even if these are not considered false, for the positivists, it could be something that would not be
endowed with a certain scientificity and, therefore, should not bring an approximation of those “vulgar”
conceptions (common sense), for example.
Carnap (1965) [6] “Many anti-metaphysicians have declared that occupation with metaphysical
questions is sterile. But, whether or not these questions can be answered, it is at any unnecessary rate
to worry about them; let us devote ourselves entirely to the practical tasks which confront active men
every day of their lives!”.
The above shows that the project mentioned above sought to provide further relevance to analytical
and synthetic propositions to the detriment of the metaphysical ones. With this, verificationism is taken
as a starting point2.
The obstacle for such tests was precisely the amount of empirical tests to be carried out.
Nevertheless, since this trend held the assertive security of the propositions so that the scientific status
was corroborated, and given the impossibility of infinite experiments, they elaborated the confirmation
criterion which, in turn, dealt with a certain number of proofs that, to the number of assertions increased,
the propositions analyzed there would reach a greater degree of reliability and, therefore, would achieve
the credibility required by such statute.
Now, the way is paved for Hempel and Carnap to suggest the hypothetical-deductive model to settle
questions about theoretical terms. From a perspective, from then on, any theory that passed its tests
would have, in an analogous way, all its propositions validated.
The main reason for such a model is exposed, yet, it is preponderant to deal with this in practice.
The hypothetical-deductive model has the mission of attributing a logical structure to the theories, and
these should present in their body a general law (at least), besides a set of initial conjunctures.
2
Verificationism, also known as the verification principle or the verifiability criterion of meaning, is the philosophical doctrine which
maintains that only statements that are empirically verifiable (i.e. verifiable through the senses) are cognitively meaningful, or
else they are truths of logic (tautologies).
A crucial aspect in this regard is to understand the question of explanans and explanandum. The first
can be understood by-laws or else by explanatory theories. Explanandum, in turn, would be the fact to
be proven.
Here, there is a degree of repudiation of metaphysics, mainly based on logicism, typical of influential
authors such as Bertrand Russell and Wittgenstein. Therefore, the followers of this critical mindset state
that deductive logical designs could not produce any misunderstanding, which characterizes
indefectible processes. According to Lorenzano (2011) [7], this phase of epistemology (or philosophy
of science) can be called the “classical phase,” where the inherited conception and its precursors are
established (Carnap, Reichenbach, Popper, Hempel, Nagel, among others).
Yet for Adúriz-Bravo et al. (2006) [3] prudently highlight an essential difference between an image
of “empiricpositivist” science that can present itself as an obstacle to quality science education and
contributions from the epistemological school known as logical positivist (mid-twentieth century),
which provided rigorous conceptualizations regarding the present-day nature of science that can serve
as valuable points of ponderation for teachers of natural sciences.
The whole intention here is to demonstrate, despite the “empiricpositivist” image, as a school, there
have been unequivocal collaborations up to the present day and, therefore, the training of science
teachers is functional whether initially or continuously.
2.2 For a quality scientific education
For Adúriz-Bravo (1999) [8], with the objective of significant improvement in scientific education
and science teaching, there was a concomitant development of new scientific and private didactic
disciplines in various parts of the world. Since then, these new areas of knowledge have concentrated
efforts in two specific areas: curriculum settings and teacher training.
Here, then, it contemplates the core of our concern regarding the formation offered by the Federal
University of Vale do São Francisco – UNIVASF, in the interior of Bahia. Analyzing its curriculum, a
more recent, latent concern concerning a scientific education advocated in the scope of the Nature of
Science (NOS – for its acronym in English) is not noticeable. At least not directly, established in the
field of its curriculum, for example, a discipline of teaching practices in natural sciences or something
like that. Similarly, the continuing education provided by the Juazeiro-BA pole of the National
Professional Master’s Degree in Physics Teaching – MNPEF also seems outdated in this role.
It is essential to highlight that the work carried out by these groups, both the group of professors
from the undergraduate course in Nature Sciences and those responsible for the MNPEF course, both
taught in the interior of the state of Bahia, is of utmost importance for the care of the teacher training
that heroically transforms lives and prepares future generations.
This is precisely the concern raised here because the meta-knowledge of the knowledge/science
teaching is a common point among several authors who recognize this as preponderant for the
improvement of the practices of natural science teachers and that a good part of these meta-theoretical
components is provided by Epistemology and History of Science. Among these authors, we highlight
Driver et al. (1996); Duschl (1997); Mellado (1997); Acevedo (2000); Adúriz-Bravo (1999, 2001) y
Adúriz-Bravo et al. (2006).
Intending to answer the initial questions, Adúriz-Bravo et al. (2006) claims: “in the task of teaching
science, the epistemological contents can support and give structure to the images of science that are
currently considered as valuable contents for the education of “scientifically literate citizen.”
In what is presented, the authors draw attention to issues intrinsic to meta-scientific contents, such
as epistemology itself, which reminds the provisional character of science. Moreover, the history of
science whose presentation constantly seems to affront somehow the epistemic values concerning
Whig’s interpretations, so insistently contemplated, especially in textbooks, determines a mistaken
attribution, from the point of view of the development of science itself. And, finally, science sociology
notably does not even seem to play any role in the “progress” of natural sciences, even if performed by
human beings or a research group.
3. Conclusions
This article brings the dimension of the impact of this classic phase in some aspects consistent with
Science Teaching.
It cannot be denied that the Vienna Circle overvalued the empirical sciences to the detriment of a
broader philosophy of science. There are, for example, some scientific claims that are neither analytical
nor experimentally verified; however, claiming that they are meaningless cannot be accepted from an
epistemological point of view.
Regarding positive factors, from the point of view, these can be analyzed from the question raised
at the beginning of this work when we embraced it as a critical epistemological trend - how can we
communicate them to science teachers?
When looking at it from this perspective, one can occasionally see some possible and significant
approaches to science teachers in training (pre-graduate or continuing). For example: i. the relentless
search for formal and empirical knowledge (from a rational perspective, the techniques adopted here
are based on language and mathematical analysis); ii. scientific humanism (using positivism as a
scientific method) can be used indirectly in education. For example, the relationship between objectives
sought through applied educational methods can come from a developed philosophy by positivism
itself. Since the positivists established that the relationship between ends and means must be
scientifically determined, the term scientific humanism can be attributed a new posture of this school
because, in this way, it no longer believes in the search for absolute truth as the main motto, opening
the way to allow the attempt to discover that relative truth that can be empirically examined).
Notably, the Vienna Circle had a unique stance towards the philosophy characterized by empiricism,
the only way to reach knowledge, and symbolic logic as the chosen method to settle problems of
philosophical nature. It is the role of everyone involved in the educational process to take such debates
to the classrooms and foster a critical and pondering spirit on such issues, without forgetting rigorous
epistemological surveillance and systematic contextualization.
4. References
[1] Gil, Antônio Carlos. Como elaborar projetos de pesquisa. 4. ed., Atlas, São Paulo, 2002. ISBN:
978-8597012613
[2] Klimovsky, G. Las desventuras del conocimiento científico. Una introducción a la epistemología.
AZ Editores, Buenos Aires, 1994.
[3] Verhaegh, Sander. The American Reception of Logical Positivism: First Encounters, 1929–1932.
The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science. pp. 106-142,
Volume 10, Number 1, Spring 2020. doi.org/10.1086/707750
[4] Adúriz-Bravo, Agustín; Salazar, Isabel; Mena, Nubia; Badillo, Edelmira. La Epistemología en la
Formación del Profesorado de Ciencias Naturales: Aportaciones del Positivismo Lógico. Revista
Electrónica de Investigación en Educación en Ciencias, vol. 1, núm. 1, octubre, pp. 6-23
Universidad Nacional del Centro de la Provincia de Buenos Aires Buenos Aires, Argentina, 2006.
URL: https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/2733/273320433003.pdf
[5] Demos, R. Aspects of Positivism. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, v. 13, n. 3, p.337-
393, Mar., 1953. doi.org/10.2307/2103939
[6] Carnap, R. The Elimination of Metaphysics Through Logical Analysis of Language. Translated
Arthur Pap, p. 60-81. Acessado
[7] Lorenzano, P. La teorización filosófica sobre la ciencia en el siglo xx (y lo que va del XXI).
Discusiones Filosóficas. Año 12 Nº 19, Julio – diciembre, 2011, pp. 131 – 154.
[8] Adúriz-Bravo, A. Elementos de teoría y de campo para un análisis epistemológico de la didáctica
de las ciencias. Tesis de Maestría; Bellaterra: Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 1999.