|Observation language: a language that does not use any terms of a theory and therefore would be neutral, is taken to be impossible by most authors. See also experiments, theoretical terms, theoretical entities, theories, descriptions._____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. |
Theory/Observation Language/Feyerabend: even the most careful examination of an observation sentence does not disturb the concepts by which it is expressed or the structure of the perception image. How can one examine something that is constantly used and presupposed in every statement?
Observation/Observation Language/Feyerabend: there is no point in invoking the observation, if one does not know how to describe an observation!
Observation Concepts/Feyerabend: they are Trojan horses, to which you have to pay close attention.
Observation Language/Feyerabend: the concepts hidden in the observation statements can hardly be found in the more abstract parts of language. Concepts, like perceptions, are ambiguous and dependent on the background. Moreover, the content of a concept is also determined by how it is related to perception.
The only way to break out of this circle: use of an external comparison scale, new relationships between concepts and perceptions. >tower example (I 89)
Tower Argument/Feyerabend: heavy bodies fall perpendicular to the earth 's surface. This is considered an irrefutable argument for the fact that the earth does not move.)
Tower Example/Feyerabend: we can now turn the argument around, and use it as a search engine that helps us in discovering the natural interpretations that preclude the movement of the earth.
To do so, we first assert the movement of the earth and then examine the changes that might resolve this contradiction.
Natural Interpretation/Feyerabend: if you have identified them, you cannot, of course, compare them to the "observation results". They do not exist anymore.
Some older rationalists wanted to assign only a subordinate auxiliary function to the observation. Galileo did not go that way.
Observation Language/Galileo/Feyerabend: he introduces a new observation language: the senses are only responsible for relative movements! Joint movement has no effect. No matter which movement is ascribed to the earth, it must remain unnoticed.
Problem: on the other hand, Galileo also says: nothing moves in a straight line naturally. I.e. horses, carriages, etc. must also move on circular paths.
"Adaptation words" (Austin related to Aristotle). E.g. "like", "corresponding". They allow a comparison between different observation languages.
Observation Language/Feyerabend: one needs a fair comparison: one must ensure that an observation language is not criticized because it is not yet sufficiently known and therefore less closely connected with our sense perceptions and less obvious than a more common language. We must learn to speak all the observation languages with the same fluency. Introducing purely cognitive languages should be avoided.
Theory/Observation Language/Feyerabend: a contradiction between theory and observation can certainly reveal a mistake in the observation language. It is obvious to change the language of observation, to adapt it to the new theory and to see what happens._____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. The note [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition.
Against Method. Outline of an Anarchistic Theory of Knowledge, London/New York 1971
Wider den Methodenzwang Frankfurt 1997
Science in a Free Society, London/New York 1982
Erkenntnis für freie Menschen Frankfurt 1979