Complementing Standard Abduction

Depto. de Lógica y Filosofía TeóricaFac. de FilosofíaFALSEsubmitte

Informatinio mąstymo ugdymo konstrukcionistinėje aplinkoje projektavimo moksliniai tyrimai: pragmatistinė perspektyva

[full article, abstract in English; abstract in Lithuanian] The article examines the modern computer-based educational environment and the requirements of the possible cognitive interface that enables the learner’s cognitive grounding by incorporating abductive reasoning into the educational process. Although the main emphasis is on cognitive and physiological aspects, the practical tools for enabling computational thinking in a modern constructionist educational environment are discussed. The presented analytical material and developed solutions are aimed at education with computers. However, the proposed solutions can be generalized in order to create a computer-free educational environment. The generalized paradigm here is pragmatism, considered as a philosophical assumption. By designing and creating a pragmatist educational environment, a common way of organizing computational thinking that enables constructionist educational solutions can be found.[straipsnis ir santrauka anglų kalba, santrauka lietuvių kalba] Straipsnyje nagrinėjama šiuolaikinė kompiuterinėmis technologijomis grįsta edukacinė aplinka. Aptariami kognityvinės sąsajos, skirtos besimokančiojo įgyjamoms žinioms sieti su realaus pasaulio objektais ar reiškiniais, reikalavimai. Šį susiejimą siūloma realizuoti į ugdymo procesą įtraukiant abdukcinius samprotavimus. Straipsnyje aptariamos praktinės priemonės informatiniam mąstymui ugdyti šiuolaikinėje konstrukcionistinėje aplinkoje, akcentuojant kognityvinius ir fiziologinius aspektus ir jungiant kelių paradigmų teorijas. Pateikta analitinė medžiaga ir siūlomi sprendimai skirti kompiuterinei ugdymo aplinkai, tačiau gali būti apibendrinti ir bendrajai ugdymo aplinkai be technologijų. Filosofine prielaida čia laikoma generalizuota pragmatizmo paradigma. Projektuojant ir kuriant pragmatistinę ugdymo aplinką, randamas informatinio mąstymo ugdymo naudojant konstrukcionistinius edukacinius sprendimus būdas

Concerning the Epistemology of Design : The Role of the Eco-Cognitive Model of Abduction in Pragmatism

Altres ajuts: the PRIN 2017 Research 20173YP4N3-MIUR, Ministry of University and Research, Rome, ItalyDesign has usually been linked to art and applied in scenarios related to everyday life. Even when design has, on occasion, made its way into the world of academia, it has always been closely linked to art and scenarios related everyday life. At last, however, the idea of design has reached the field of epistemology: an area within the very heart of philosophy that has always focused, in theory, on the foundations of knowledge. Consequently, design is being studied from different approaches interested in the foundation of knowledge, theoretical and practical. This is one of the reasons why abduction and pragmatism have been considered relevant from a design perspective. This paper first shows the main features of abduction and pragmatism, describes their evolution and considers their mutual implications. Second, the epistemology of design is analysed considering its most relevant characteristics. Third, the connection between abduction and, on the one hand, pragmatism and, on the other, design epistemology is addressed. Finally, the role of abductive inference in grounding a real epistemology for design theory from the naturalised cognitive perspective of abduction is outlined. The central proposition is that this approach is essential as a methodological innovation, as it allows us to analyse both the inquiry process and the design process as interdependent when dealing with practical problems of a social and cultural nature. This approach allows us to analyse how human actions determine changes in the theoretical framework from which we make our inquiry. In short, the world is an open-ended project that humans design through our daily inquiry

Pragmatism and methodology: doing research that matters with mixed methods

DescriptionContentsResourcesCoursesAbout the Authors Taking a pragmatist approach to methods and methodology that fosters meaningful, impactful, and ethical research, this book rises to the challenge of today's data revolution. It shows how pragmatism can turn challenges, such as the abundance and accumulation of big qualitative data, into opportunities. The authors summarize the pragmatist approach to different aspects of research, from epistemology, theory, and questions to ethics, as well as data collection and analysis. The chapters outline and document a new type of mixed methods design called 'multi-resolution research,” which serves to overcome old divides between quantitative and qualitative methods. It is the ideal resource for students and researchers within the social and behavioural sciences seeking new ways to analyze large sets of qualitative data. This book is also available as Open Access on Cambridge Core

The Difficult Reception of Rigorous Descriptive Social Science in the Law

Mutual disdain is an effective border patrol at the demarcation lines between disciplines. Social scientists tend to react with disdain when they observe how their findings are routinely stripped of all the caveats, assumptions and careful limitations once they travel into law. Likewise, lawyers tend to react with disdain when they read all the laborious proofs and checks for what looks to them like a minuscule detail in a much larger picture. But mutual disdain comes at a high price. All cross-border intellectual trade is stifled. This paper explores the social science/law border from the legal side. The natural barriers turn out to be significant, but not insurmountable. Specifically the paper looks at the challenges of integrating rigorous descriptive social science into the application of the law in force by courts and administrative authorities. This is where the gap is most difficult to bridge. The main impediments are implicit value judgments inherent in models, conceptual languages and strictly controlled ways of generating empirical evidence; the difference between explanation, hypothesis testing and prediction, on the one hand, and decision-making, on the other; the ensuing difference between theoretical and practical reasoning, and the judicial tradition of engaging in holistic thinking; last but not least, the strife of the legal system for autonomy, in order to maintain its viability. If a legal academic assumes the position of an outside observer, she may entirely ignore all these concerns and simply follow the methodological standards of descriptive social science. This is, for instance, what most of law and economics does. The legal academic may, instead, choose to contribute to the making of new law. She will then find it advisable to partly ignore the strictures of rigorous methodology in order to be open to more aspects of the regulatory issue. But it is not difficult, at least, to follow the standards of the social sciences for analysing the core problem. The integration is most difficult if an academic does doctrinal work. But it is precisely here where the division of intellectual labour between legal practice and legal academia is most important. Academics who themselves are versatile in the respective social science translate the decisive insights into suggestions for a better reading of statutory provisions or case law.law and economics, law and statistics, explanation vs. decision-making, practical reasoning, psychology of judicial decision-making

Design thinking support: information systems versus reasoning

Numerous attempts have been made to conceive and implement appropriate information systems to support architectural designers in their creative design thinking processes. These information systems aim at providing support in very diverse ways: enabling designers to make diverse kinds of visual representations of a design, enabling them to make complex calculations and simulations which take into account numerous relevant parameters in the design context, providing them with loads of information and knowledge from all over the world, and so forth. Notwithstanding the continued efforts to develop these information systems, they still fail to provide essential support in the core creative activities of architectural designers. In order to understand why an appropriately effective support from information systems is so hard to realize, we started to look into the nature of design thinking and on how reasoning processes are at play in this design thinking. This investigation suggests that creative designing rests on a cyclic combination of abductive, deductive and inductive reasoning processes. Because traditional information systems typically target only one of these reasoning processes at a time, this could explain the limited applicability and usefulness of these systems. As research in information technology is increasingly targeting the combination of these reasoning modes, improvements may be within reach for design thinking support by information systems

The role of abduction in production of new ideas in design

The pragmatist philosopher Peirce insisted that besides deduction and induction there is a third main form of inference, abduction, which is the only type of inference capable of producing new ideas. Also he defined abduction as a stage of the methodological process in science, where hypotheses are formed to explain anomalies. Basing on these seminal ideas, scholars have proposed modified, widened or alternative definitions of abduction and devised taxonomies of abductive inferences. Influenced by Peirce’s seminal writings and subsequent treatments on abduction in philosophy of science, design scholars have in the last 40 years endeavoured to shed light on design by means of the concept of abduction. The first treatment was provided by March in 1976. He viewed that abduction, which he called “productive reasoning”, is the key mode of reasoning in design. He also presented a three-step cyclic design process, similar to Peirce’s methodological process in science. Among the many other later treatments of design abduction, Roozenburg’s definition of explanatory and innovative abduction is noteworthy. However, an evaluation of the related literature suggests that research into abduction in design is still in an undeveloped stage. This research shows gaps in coverage, lack of depth and diverging outcomes. By focusing on the differences between science and design as well as on empirical knowledge of different phenomena comprising design, new conceptions of abduction in design are derived. Given the differences of context, abduction in design shows characteristics not yet found or identified in science. For example, abduction can occur in connection to practically all inference types in design; it is a property of an inference besides an inference itself. A number of the most important abductive inference types as they occur in design are identified and discussed in more detail.Peer reviewe

Abduction as a Mode of Inference in Science Education

The central argument of this article is that abduction as a “mode of inference” is a key element in the nature of scientists’ science and should consequently be introduced in school science. Abduction generally understood as generation and selection of hypotheses permits to articulate the classical scientific contexts of discovery and justification and provides educational insights into scientific methodology, this being a particularly important issue in science teaching. However, abductive reasoning has been marginally treated in the philosophy of science until relatively recently; accordingly, we deem it important to perform an “archaeology” of the concept that considers C. S. Peirce’s seminal contributions. We also choose to review contemporary treatments in order to recognise useful classifications to support more meaningful ways of teaching science and the nature of science. An elucidation of the participation of abductive inferences in knowledge construction seems necessary for us to derive conceptual input for the understanding and design of explanations in school science. Some prospective examples of “school scientific abduction” are discussed in the article through the lens of the results of our theoretical analysis.Fil: Aduriz Bravo, Agustin. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Centro de Formación e Investigación en Enseñanza de las Ciencias; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Sans Pinillos, Alger. Universita degli Studi di Pavia; Itali

Layers in the Fabric of Mind: A Critical Review of Cognitive Ontogeny

The essay is critically examines the conceptual problems with the influential modularity model of mind. We shall see that one of the essential characters of modules, namely informational encapsulation, is not only inessential, it ties a knot at a crucial place blocking the solution to the problem of understanding the formation of concepts from percepts (nodes of procedural knowledge). Subsequently I propose that concept formation takes place by modulation of modules leading to cross-representations, which were otherwise prevented by encapsulation. It must be noted that the argument is not against modular architecture, but a variety of an architecture that prevents interaction among modules. This is followed by a brief argument demonstrating that module without modularization, i.e. without developmental history, is impossible. Finally the emerging picture of cognitive development is drawn in the form of the layers in the fabric of mind, with a brief statement of the possible implications