1) Normative vs. Empirical Claims

2) Two Varieties of Normative Claims

3) Normative Claims and Science

4) Admin

• Group Projects/Homework

Science is distinct as a form of thought in that:

(1) Only certain claims can be investigated

today

(2) Has special rules for using evidence and making assumptions to evaluate claims

(previous class)

claims are statements amount truth or validity.

the basis (reason to accept a claim) is composed of:

• evidence: data/information/etc.
• warrant: assumptions that permit evidence to “count”

scientific evidence: is evidence that meets weak severity requirement. Or, the procedures for evidence could find the claim to be wrong.

evidence is more persuasive if it meets strong severity requirement: the evidence procedures are very capable of finding evidence to be wrong.

strong severity implies: testing assumptions in the warrant; employing evidence using different plausible assumptions in the warrant; using evidence procedures that make weaker (more easily defended) assumptions.

What kinds of claims can we investigate?

An attempt to motivate people to behave differently. An attempt to exercise power. Access to media outlets enables power.

(1) US is not experiencing (comparatively) high levels of immigration

• Lebanon (4.4 million people) has had more than 1 million refugees in less than 10 years (>25%)
• American (325 million people) has 44 million immigrants (13.7 percent)
• Rate of immigration to US has slowed over the past 10 years

(2) High immigration rates do not lead to political instability.

• Canada and Australia have populations that are 20 and 28 percent foreign-born, but no major political problems

(3) New immigrants are employed at high rates.

• Unemployment among immigrants is lower than native-born Americans
• not a burden on state provision of social services

(4) Lower immigration slows economic growth

• Fertility rates among native-born Americans are dropping
• Because of that, future workforce will be smaller, productivity will be less, growth will slow

(5) America should admit 1 million more immigrants per year

• So growth rates can remain high

Which of these five claims could be supported or rejected using scientific evidence?

Head to menti.com and use code \(2498 \ 5905\)

Select all that apply.

“Actually, the Numbers [Don’t] Show That”

\(\checkmark\) if science could test:

1. US is not experiencing high levels of immigration \(\checkmark\)

2. High immigration rates do not lead to political instability \(\checkmark\)

3. New immigrants are employed at high rates \(\checkmark\)

4. Lower immigration slows economic growth \(\checkmark\)

5. America should admit 1 million more immigrants per year

Even if 1-4 are true, what must we to assume to conclude that (5) is true?

“Actually, the Numbers [Don’t] Show That”

“America should admit 1 million more immigrants per year”

Even if 1-4 are true: we need to assume that economic growth is desirable to conclude that (5) is true.

Which varieties of claims/questions can be addressed with science?

Three dimensions

1. Empirical vs. Normative
2. Varieties of empirical and normative claims/questions
3. Falsifiable vs. unfalsifiable

empirical claim:

is a claim about what is/exists or how things that exist affect each other.

The basis/evidence for empirical claims

• consists of observation of the world.
• no assumption about what is good/desirable.

normative claim:

is a claim about what is desirable or undesirable.

• assert what should or should not be.
• “should” implied by the language of “right”/“wrong”
• “should” implied by “too much”, “enough”, or “not enough” of something.
• “should” implied by standards for what is “better”/“worse”

The basis/evidence for a normative claim:

• must assume a value about what is desirable/undesirable

1. US is not experiencing high levels of immigration

2. High immigration rates do not lead to political instability

3. New immigrants are employed at high rates

4. Lower immigration slows economic growth

5. America should admit 1 million more immigrants per year

descriptive claims:

claims about what exists (or has existed/will exist) in the world:

• what phenomena exist (what kinds of things exist?)
• what is the type of a specific phenomenon (what is this thing?)
• amount/frequency of phenomena (how much of something is there?)
• relative amount/frequency of phenomena across different places/times (how much of something is there here vs. there/now vs. then?)
• what patterns are there in the shared appearance/non-appearance of different phenomena (does this thing usually appear together with that other thing?)

causal claims:

are claims about the how one phenomena (\(X\)) affects or causes another phenomena (\(Y\)). Causal claims state that \(X\) acts on \(Y\) in some way, not merely that they appear together in some pattern:

• the effect that one thing or event has on another thing (effects of causes)
• the cause of some event or thing in the world (causes of effects)
• the conditions under which some thing or event happens (causes of effects)
• the process through which one thing affects another (causes of effects)

1. US is not experiencing high levels of immigration

2. High immigration rates do not lead to political instability

3. New immigrants are employed at high rates

4. Lower immigration slows economic growth

5. America should admit 1 million more immigrants per year

value judgments:

are normative claims that

• state what goal or ideal is “right” or “good”
• or provide criteria/rules for judging what is “better” or “worse”.

They are not:

• empirical claims for which the evidence is invalid or missing
• empirical claims that we can’t persuade someone to drop in the face of better evidence

“Vancouver is a city on the edge. It seems politicians and the police are unable, unwilling or incapable of stopping what has turned into a version of Dante’s Hell on the Downtown Eastside — illicit drug sales, open drug use, the stolen property bazaar, garbage, weapons, assaults, rape.

Vancouver no longer has a public health crisis that can be solved by needle exchanges, supervised injection sites, a naloxone-carting population, and pharmaceuticals substituted for illicit drugs. It is going to take more to solve the housing crisis by repurposing older hotels and simply putting roofs over people’s heads — a lot more.

Solving it requires bold leadership and a willingness to go beyond what has been done in the past, using evidence-based solutions that are in the best interests of all residents. Everyone deserves to feel safe, protected and respected, regardless of which neighbourhood they live in.”

• Editorial in the Vancouver Sun

prescriptive claims:

are normative claims that assert what kinds of actions should be taken

• hint: like a doctor or pharmacist, it prescribes a course of action.
• overlap with justifications/reasons given by power.

The basis for a prescriptive claim includes

• evidence supporting an empirical claim about the consequences of some action (causal claim)
• an assumption that some value judgment is correct.

\((5)\) America should admit 1 million more immigrants per year.

Value judgment? Prescriptive Claim?

(5) America should admit 1 million more immigrants per year

This is a prescriptive claim:

For it to be true…

1. What value judgments must we assume to be true?

2. What empirical claims must be true?

(5) America should admit 1 million more immigrants per year

scientific evidence cannot “prove” this claim

even if we evidence that is very capable of finding any flaws in claim that increasing immigration increases economic growth… (strong severity)

people who value cultural/ethnic homogeneity more than economic growth can’t be persuaded

Empirical claims: can be evaluated using science

• only need to assume that there is an objective world that we share
• other assumptions about how we provide evidence of that objective world open to question

Normative claims: cannot (fully) be evaluated using science

• value judgments cannot be evaluated with science
• prescriptive claims can partially be evaluated with science

You and your friends win a large sum of money in a lottery

You and your friends agree: you should aim to do the most good by donating the money.

You consider some options…

Which should you donate to?

• Option 1: Make-a-Wish (more Batkid, pls)
• Option 2: Mosquito Nets
• Option 3: Direct transfer of cash to impoverished people

Menti.com and use code \(8949 \ 1391\)

Peter Singer and effective altruists say yes!

• we can evaluate which of these does the most good!

“Saving a child’s life has to be better than fulfilling a child’s wish to be Batkid.”

But wait, your friend says: experiments show that directly giving cash

• benefits the health, education, and life choices of children
• empowers women to be financially independent, escape abuse
• improve mental health

What should you do?

If you value minimizing suffering, but your friend values maximizing individual freedom…

then science cannot help us, because the disagreement is rooted in value judgements

“We should donate money for mosquito nets” is a prescriptive claim.

• Scientific evidence for empirical claim that “Mosquito nets (A) prevent malaria (B)”
  • NOT enough to conclude that does not imply “we should do (A)”: it depends on how we value B
• if we also accept value judgement that it reducing suffering is more important than maximizing freedom (or coolness)
  • THEN we can accept the prescriptive claim

Need to accept the causal (empirical) claim that \(A \to B\) AND a value judgment that \(B\) is good.

Science is still be helpful!

• If we assume less mortality is good (B) (a value judgment)
• What if science shows: mosquito nets don’t prevent malaria deaths. (empirical evidence)
• “A does/does not cause B” is informative!

Empirical vs Normative Claims

• scientifically evaluate empirical claims, not normative claims
• prescriptive claims include empirical claims in their basis

1. Group Projects:

• groups assigned within tutorials; on Canvas tomorrow.
• group project assignment 1/group contract available on Friday morning

1. Homework 1:

• assignment becomes available on Friday morning
• can start over the weekend; we cover more relevant material on Monday