Q&A: John Bickle
The fifth edition of
Understanding Scientific Reasoning
, co-authored by philosophy department head John Bickle, was published in July by Thomson Wadsworth. Bickles comments on the text and its recent revisions explain why it has been so successful.
Q: The book is actually fascinating reading, but you wrote it as a text. Correct?
A: Correct. For the fifth edition, my primary job was to bring it up-to-date scientifically. Earlier editions have been used widely in undergraduate education, ranging from courses on critical thinking to philosophy of science to science studies to scientific methods. It introduces the full range of scientific reasoningtheoretical, statistical, and causal reasoning, plus rational decision-makingby way of the underlying statistics and detailed case studies from a variety of disciplines.
Q: The work is unique because of the deliberate attempt to make students recognize that the philosophy of science is not esoteric but directly relevant to past and current human experience. Explain how this works in part one where your co-authors focus on theoretical hypotheses.
A: There is widespread misunderstanding of theory as that term is used in scientific contexts. People tend to think of theory as opposed to fact, as when someone says that some hypothesis is just a theory. In science, however, a theory is a family of
models
and a set of
theoretical hypoteheses
postulating that specific events in the real world fit one of the familys models. In the books early chapters we provide and explain a neat illustration that relates these features to observation and experimentation, and then illustrate this process using well-known cases from the history of science.
Q: You wrote parts two and three on evaluating statistical and casual hypotheses and knowledge, values, and decision making. Define casual relation and give examples of what students will learn.
A: Analyzing cause is a difficult endeavoras the past 2,500 years of philosophy attests. We dont attempt that. Our project is more internal to science. Whatever causes actually are, we explain the statistical relationships between causal hypotheses and models (both deterministic and probabilistic). We explicitly distinguish cause from statistical correlation and present some recent case studies that illustrate and distinguish controlled, prospective, and retrospective experimental designs. I also inserted a new section on the search for causal mechanisms, especially in recent bio-medical science.
Q: You used different exercises from those in earlier editions. Why?
A: I drew many new exercisesbrief descriptions of scientific experiments and resultsfrom internet news sources, some as recent as 2005. Examples range from a study of urban hardship levels across major U.S. cities to the effects of yo-yo dieting on immune system function to genetic links for more effective cancer drug therapies. We instruct readers to apply the resources we develop and illustrate for evaluating each type of scientific reasoning. One goal of the book is to make people better scientific reasonersand hence better consumers of scientific information.
Q: In part three you concentrate on models of decision making. What do you most want students to understand after having read this material?
A: I seek to convince readers that scientific reasoning (not just its products) is applicable to daily decision-making. I try to communicate one resource, modern utility theory, that the social sciences have developed for combining probabilities of outcomes with subjective judgments of value. Finally, I hope that readers will see ways to concretize statistical discussions into easy-to-grasp (but still mathematically legitimate) conceptual models so that real-life decisions (like whether to smoke cigarettes) can be evaluated in a new light.
Related Stories
From Punchline to Pride: An Ohio class on the history of Queer
January 16, 2025
In an interview with The Buckeye Flame, a publication that amplifies the voices of LGBTQ+ Ohioans to support community and civic empowerment, UC adjunct professor Nicholas Belperio describes the impact of a class he teaches titled “Queer TV.”
WDET: Potential U.S. TikTok ban weighs national security against...
January 16, 2025
UC cybersecurity expert Dr. Richard Harknett discusses a TikTok ban with Detroit public radio. The U.S. Supreme Court is weighing whether a law passed by Congress and signed by President Joe Biden is constitutional.
Mosquitoes can be extra-bitey in droughts
January 15, 2025
UC biologists found that mosquitoes survive prolonged droughts by drinking blood, which explains how their populations rebound so quickly when it finally rains.