|
|
What is meant by the claim that observation is theory-laden? Is the claim correct, or is something wrong with asking this question? Theory-laden, as defined by the oxford English dictionary is designing a term, statement, etc, the use of which implies acceptance of some theory. The claim that observation is theory-laden is true. This is in relation to the fact that we can never stand before something naked, in the lights that we do not have a predjudism, (presupposition) against something, related to an old true belief. Theory-laden is also specific to each individual as it relies on individuals prior beliefs and how they look at new theories and examples put before them. Induction causes us to be born with presumption of space and time. The brain also works to interprete information. Outside observations cause us to interpret things in relation to our conventional schema’s. This is the way we observe things and gow we interprete them. Schema’s therefore process information through our brains. Wheb looking at observations, it’s easy to see how things appear differently to a human and a bat for example. This confirms the facts that things are determined by how the individual itself thinks and how the information is processed and perceived. One example is superluminal velocities. Since 1971 radio astronomers had been following the quasars- (A&B) which have been moving away from each other. (we can take A to be fixed and B to be relative to A).
|
