Rhetoric -> Pragmatism -> Dewey
John Dewey (1938) Logic: The Theory of Inquiry, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Chicago. Republished in 1980.
Chapter 6. The pattern of Inquiry
Dewey starts the chapter with an overview of the preceding chapters:
"The first chapter set forth the fundamental thesis of this volume: Logical forms accrue to subject-matter when the latter is subjected to controlled inquiry. It also set forth some of the implications of this thesis for the nature of logical theory. The second and third chapters stated the independent grounds, biological and cultural, for holding that logic is a theory of experiential naturalistic subject-matter. The first of the next two chapters developed the theme with reference to the relations of the logic of common sense and science, while the second discussed Aristotelian logic as the organized formulation of the language of Greek life, when that language is regarded as the expression of the meanings of Greek culture and of the significance attributed to various forms of natural existence. It was held throughout these chapters that inquiry, in spite of the diverse subjects to which it applies, and the consequent diversity of its special techniques has a common structure or pattern: that this common structure is applied both in common sense and science, although because of the nature of the problems with which they are concerned, the emphasis upon the factors involved varies widely in the two modes. We now come to the consideration of the common pattern."
Essentially, Dewey has spent the first five chapters setting up the argument that inquiry happens in all walks of life. To him, logic is a theory of experience that is observable and, thus, available for inquiry. There are many types of inquiry (biological or cultural, common sense or scientific) and yet all of these types of inquiry share a particular pattern. In this chapter, Dewey focuses on this pattern.
Fundamentally, Dewey conceives of inquiry as an observable behavior, that can be studied, like any other daily practice. To him, it is also a behavior that permeates much of life and, thus, it is extraordinarily important to study it. To him, there is nothing irrational or "mentalistic" in inquiry. Inquiry is purely logical and this is what sets logical theory apart from the unobservable, transcendental and "intuitional". Yet at the same time Dewey makes sure that we do not fall into the trap of ultra-reductionism, where empricism sometimes ends up. He explicitly states that "logic is not compelled to reduce logical forms to mere transcripts of the empirical materials that antecede the existence of the former." To Dewey, inquiry is a form of logical theory, and yet it is not what Herb Simon would conceive of theory. It is far more inclusive, not trapped in the binding tenents of an empiricist drive to find an underlying commonality, an "order out of chaos". In fact, Dewey suggests that logical forms "originate out of experiential material, and when constrituted introduce new ways of operating with prior materials, which ways modify the material out of which they develop." In other words, daily experience may drive the pattern of inquiry arriving at an independent logical form that may exist yet does not have to be final or complete, because the experience of which it is borne is never final or complete itself.
Dewey explicitly states that the logic of inquiry only observes the way "men do think" but does not prescribe the way they ought to think. In this book, "the way in which men do "think" denotes ... simply the ways in which men at a given time carry on their inquiries." In so far as Dewey is concerned, the only time men should not think in a particular way, is when the methods of inquiry they employ are known as bad methods that will not answer the problem in question. In his own words "it's like a difference between good and bad farming".
So... what is Inquiry? According to Dewey Inquiry is the controlled or directed transformation of an indeterminate situation into one that is so determinate in its constituent distinctions and relations as to convert the elements of the original situation into a unified whole.
That is - when there is something unknown, the process of inquiry is capable of providing us with the knowledge that makes the unknown known. So the process of inquiry is something like the following:
1. There is an indeterminate situation - a situation that evokes questions. It is a situation that has the characteristic of "unique doubtfulness" which makes that situation what it is. That is, this "unique doubtfulness" is not trivial to the situation. A situation can be indeterminate at the outset (i.e. we need to reduce our consumption of fossil fuel but do not know how) or a determinate situation can be made indeterminate (disturbed as it may) when overlooked facts are brought to light or long-standing beliefs are shaken (i.e. many people thought residential mobility was on the rise, turns out it is actually diminishing... why?).
2. So... once there is an indeterminate situation, it is subjected to inquiry. The process of inquiry makes the situation problematic. This is different from indeterminacy... When a situation is problematic, that means that it has been deemed in need of inquiry. The problem must originate from an actual indeterminate situation. Asking questions that do not have useful answers is not a process of inquiry. So a situation may be called problematic, but only worthwhile problems originate from indeterminate situations.
3. Once there is a problem, there must be a method that will lead to a solution of the problem. For Dewey "the first step in institution of hte problem is to settle them in observation". Dewey suggests that for every nail that is a hammer, and yet we must observe characteristics of both nails and happers closely to pick the right pair. This observation is paramountly important. "A possible relevant solution is ... suggested by the determination of factual conditions which are secured in observation." So... the third step is in assessing the possibility of solving a problem through finding the appropriate method of solution. The right approach. In fact, Dewey does suggest "a set of controlled observations and of regulated conceptual ways of interpreting them", but cautions against the finality of such approach, saying that "because inquiry is a progressive determination of a problem and its possible solution, ideas differ in grade according to the stage of inquiry reached." For Dewey ideas are suggestions and they can be vague. This vagueness does not discount them. They must be evaluated as potential tools that could fit the problem regardless of the vagueness of their construction.
4. Once a method has been developed, it must be applied to the problem through reasoning. This is when the vagueness of the initial ideas/approaches is developed and relations of ideas are noted. When conclusions are reached, they must not be accepted immediately (otherwise inquiry is cut short). Conclusions must be grounded through examination of relations of the meaning proposed for acceptance and other potential meanings. The final meaning can be reached through a series of intermediate meanings/stages. This strikes me as almost an applicatoin of the actor-network theory, except here, it's an actor-meaning theory of logic as inquiry.
5. Once ideational components (ideas) are given meanings, these meanings must be realted to facts that have been gathered regarding the indeterminate situation in step 3. (Such facts as - if there is a fire in the building it is located somewhere. If a door is locked there exists a key, etc.) Facts by themselves mean little, but in combination with ideas, they can become tests for the veracity of the proposed meanings. If the solution works with all the facts in place, it is likely that we have found an adequate answer to the problem. So, we must test the facts against the meanings of the idea as we organize all the facts into a system that makes up the situation. This process enables us to observe the interaction among the facts and between facts and ideas. We must, however, keep in mind that "fact" are only relevant to specific observed cases!
So, to simplify the process:
1. There must be an indeterminate situation
2. The indeterminate situation must be identified and problem must be formulated
3. Each problem requires a necessary method that will allow us to solve the problem. This method is arrived at through observation of the problem situation and assessment of factual characteristics of the problem
4. Using the selected method we will arrive at a set of ideas that may, in fact, be ascribed meaningful solutions (meanings). This method is iterative.
5. Onces we have proposed meaningful solutions we must re-insert these ideas/solutions back into the network of facts that we already know exist in the indeterminate situation in order to test our ideas and make sure they accomodate all the facts. This test ensures that our proposed idea/solution, does, in fact make the indeterminate situation determinate once again, producing unity of facts and ideas.
Dewey spends a substantial amount of this chapter on attempts to separate common sense from scientific inquiry. He suggests that inquiry happens in both domains, but common sense may be described by "habitual culture" of "common everyday language" while the scientific inquiry requires a more generalized framework "freed from direct reference to the concerns of a limited group". So... common sense is purely situation dependant, while scientific inquiry is (at least somewhat) generalizable to broader issues.
For the most part, Dewey is mostly intersted in relations as the main objects of inquiry, while qualities are relegated to merely things that must be taken into account. In this he fundamentally differs from Simon who perceives the qualities as the main things (which can be simulated) and relations as prescribed roles that do not warrant as much attention.
Relevance:
This is an important piece that actually made Dewey unfavored among the positivist movement of the time. Dewey's system of inquiry (or logic as it may), is broad, encompassing. He resists of the limitations of pure empiricism that anchors itself through repeatability. Dewey revels in the situation and it's immediate qualities as well as those that are consistent. These immediate qualities may be observed and may influence the selection of method and generation of ideas and meanings, but they do not have to be constant or repeatable. Dewey focuses on relations between things, ideas, qualities and actors as driving forces of situations. In fact, this particular piece provides the platform from which it is possible to blend different methodologies and approaches (qualitative and quantitative). Dewey recommends picking the question and then, through observation, selecting the best suited method. He does not favor one method over the other, as long as they do not center on "mentalistic" approaches of unobservable effects. Dewey favors ideas and accepts their inevitable vagueness at the outset. He allows for exploration and encourages arrival at solutions and meanings through iteration and testing against observed characteristics. In 1938, he pointed the way in the direction opposite to the extreme quantification of results and the incessant replication of the same approaches and the same answers to the same questions. While the latter is an obviously useful technique, according to Dewey it need not be the only one.
Chapter 6. The pattern of Inquiry
Source: Abebooks.com
Dewey starts the chapter with an overview of the preceding chapters:
"The first chapter set forth the fundamental thesis of this volume: Logical forms accrue to subject-matter when the latter is subjected to controlled inquiry. It also set forth some of the implications of this thesis for the nature of logical theory. The second and third chapters stated the independent grounds, biological and cultural, for holding that logic is a theory of experiential naturalistic subject-matter. The first of the next two chapters developed the theme with reference to the relations of the logic of common sense and science, while the second discussed Aristotelian logic as the organized formulation of the language of Greek life, when that language is regarded as the expression of the meanings of Greek culture and of the significance attributed to various forms of natural existence. It was held throughout these chapters that inquiry, in spite of the diverse subjects to which it applies, and the consequent diversity of its special techniques has a common structure or pattern: that this common structure is applied both in common sense and science, although because of the nature of the problems with which they are concerned, the emphasis upon the factors involved varies widely in the two modes. We now come to the consideration of the common pattern."
Essentially, Dewey has spent the first five chapters setting up the argument that inquiry happens in all walks of life. To him, logic is a theory of experience that is observable and, thus, available for inquiry. There are many types of inquiry (biological or cultural, common sense or scientific) and yet all of these types of inquiry share a particular pattern. In this chapter, Dewey focuses on this pattern.
Fundamentally, Dewey conceives of inquiry as an observable behavior, that can be studied, like any other daily practice. To him, it is also a behavior that permeates much of life and, thus, it is extraordinarily important to study it. To him, there is nothing irrational or "mentalistic" in inquiry. Inquiry is purely logical and this is what sets logical theory apart from the unobservable, transcendental and "intuitional". Yet at the same time Dewey makes sure that we do not fall into the trap of ultra-reductionism, where empricism sometimes ends up. He explicitly states that "logic is not compelled to reduce logical forms to mere transcripts of the empirical materials that antecede the existence of the former." To Dewey, inquiry is a form of logical theory, and yet it is not what Herb Simon would conceive of theory. It is far more inclusive, not trapped in the binding tenents of an empiricist drive to find an underlying commonality, an "order out of chaos". In fact, Dewey suggests that logical forms "originate out of experiential material, and when constrituted introduce new ways of operating with prior materials, which ways modify the material out of which they develop." In other words, daily experience may drive the pattern of inquiry arriving at an independent logical form that may exist yet does not have to be final or complete, because the experience of which it is borne is never final or complete itself.
Dewey explicitly states that the logic of inquiry only observes the way "men do think" but does not prescribe the way they ought to think. In this book, "the way in which men do "think" denotes ... simply the ways in which men at a given time carry on their inquiries." In so far as Dewey is concerned, the only time men should not think in a particular way, is when the methods of inquiry they employ are known as bad methods that will not answer the problem in question. In his own words "it's like a difference between good and bad farming".
So... what is Inquiry? According to Dewey Inquiry is the controlled or directed transformation of an indeterminate situation into one that is so determinate in its constituent distinctions and relations as to convert the elements of the original situation into a unified whole.
That is - when there is something unknown, the process of inquiry is capable of providing us with the knowledge that makes the unknown known. So the process of inquiry is something like the following:
1. There is an indeterminate situation - a situation that evokes questions. It is a situation that has the characteristic of "unique doubtfulness" which makes that situation what it is. That is, this "unique doubtfulness" is not trivial to the situation. A situation can be indeterminate at the outset (i.e. we need to reduce our consumption of fossil fuel but do not know how) or a determinate situation can be made indeterminate (disturbed as it may) when overlooked facts are brought to light or long-standing beliefs are shaken (i.e. many people thought residential mobility was on the rise, turns out it is actually diminishing... why?).
2. So... once there is an indeterminate situation, it is subjected to inquiry. The process of inquiry makes the situation problematic. This is different from indeterminacy... When a situation is problematic, that means that it has been deemed in need of inquiry. The problem must originate from an actual indeterminate situation. Asking questions that do not have useful answers is not a process of inquiry. So a situation may be called problematic, but only worthwhile problems originate from indeterminate situations.
3. Once there is a problem, there must be a method that will lead to a solution of the problem. For Dewey "the first step in institution of hte problem is to settle them in observation". Dewey suggests that for every nail that is a hammer, and yet we must observe characteristics of both nails and happers closely to pick the right pair. This observation is paramountly important. "A possible relevant solution is ... suggested by the determination of factual conditions which are secured in observation." So... the third step is in assessing the possibility of solving a problem through finding the appropriate method of solution. The right approach. In fact, Dewey does suggest "a set of controlled observations and of regulated conceptual ways of interpreting them", but cautions against the finality of such approach, saying that "because inquiry is a progressive determination of a problem and its possible solution, ideas differ in grade according to the stage of inquiry reached." For Dewey ideas are suggestions and they can be vague. This vagueness does not discount them. They must be evaluated as potential tools that could fit the problem regardless of the vagueness of their construction.
4. Once a method has been developed, it must be applied to the problem through reasoning. This is when the vagueness of the initial ideas/approaches is developed and relations of ideas are noted. When conclusions are reached, they must not be accepted immediately (otherwise inquiry is cut short). Conclusions must be grounded through examination of relations of the meaning proposed for acceptance and other potential meanings. The final meaning can be reached through a series of intermediate meanings/stages. This strikes me as almost an applicatoin of the actor-network theory, except here, it's an actor-meaning theory of logic as inquiry.
5. Once ideational components (ideas) are given meanings, these meanings must be realted to facts that have been gathered regarding the indeterminate situation in step 3. (Such facts as - if there is a fire in the building it is located somewhere. If a door is locked there exists a key, etc.) Facts by themselves mean little, but in combination with ideas, they can become tests for the veracity of the proposed meanings. If the solution works with all the facts in place, it is likely that we have found an adequate answer to the problem. So, we must test the facts against the meanings of the idea as we organize all the facts into a system that makes up the situation. This process enables us to observe the interaction among the facts and between facts and ideas. We must, however, keep in mind that "fact" are only relevant to specific observed cases!
So, to simplify the process:
1. There must be an indeterminate situation
2. The indeterminate situation must be identified and problem must be formulated
3. Each problem requires a necessary method that will allow us to solve the problem. This method is arrived at through observation of the problem situation and assessment of factual characteristics of the problem
4. Using the selected method we will arrive at a set of ideas that may, in fact, be ascribed meaningful solutions (meanings). This method is iterative.
5. Onces we have proposed meaningful solutions we must re-insert these ideas/solutions back into the network of facts that we already know exist in the indeterminate situation in order to test our ideas and make sure they accomodate all the facts. This test ensures that our proposed idea/solution, does, in fact make the indeterminate situation determinate once again, producing unity of facts and ideas.
Dewey spends a substantial amount of this chapter on attempts to separate common sense from scientific inquiry. He suggests that inquiry happens in both domains, but common sense may be described by "habitual culture" of "common everyday language" while the scientific inquiry requires a more generalized framework "freed from direct reference to the concerns of a limited group". So... common sense is purely situation dependant, while scientific inquiry is (at least somewhat) generalizable to broader issues.
For the most part, Dewey is mostly intersted in relations as the main objects of inquiry, while qualities are relegated to merely things that must be taken into account. In this he fundamentally differs from Simon who perceives the qualities as the main things (which can be simulated) and relations as prescribed roles that do not warrant as much attention.
Relevance:
This is an important piece that actually made Dewey unfavored among the positivist movement of the time. Dewey's system of inquiry (or logic as it may), is broad, encompassing. He resists of the limitations of pure empiricism that anchors itself through repeatability. Dewey revels in the situation and it's immediate qualities as well as those that are consistent. These immediate qualities may be observed and may influence the selection of method and generation of ideas and meanings, but they do not have to be constant or repeatable. Dewey focuses on relations between things, ideas, qualities and actors as driving forces of situations. In fact, this particular piece provides the platform from which it is possible to blend different methodologies and approaches (qualitative and quantitative). Dewey recommends picking the question and then, through observation, selecting the best suited method. He does not favor one method over the other, as long as they do not center on "mentalistic" approaches of unobservable effects. Dewey favors ideas and accepts their inevitable vagueness at the outset. He allows for exploration and encourages arrival at solutions and meanings through iteration and testing against observed characteristics. In 1938, he pointed the way in the direction opposite to the extreme quantification of results and the incessant replication of the same approaches and the same answers to the same questions. While the latter is an obviously useful technique, according to Dewey it need not be the only one.
posted by Q at 01:21
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home