I participated in the lecture and the seminar this week. I discussed in the divided seminar group in the seminar where we talked generally about the definition of theory. One thing we talked about was whether and how philosophical and scientific theories are related.
I spent some time finding relevant journals and papers. I did not feel like I had to struggle that much to find the relevant answers to the themes questions this week, maybe because of how the paper was structured. Even though the questions for the blog this week in large was to understand literature and paper and draw conclusions, I felt that it was also more practical and that parts of it was to find the right answers in the paper by using the literature as manual.
I think the important issue of the week was to understand theory as a whole. I think one could think of it as, even though there might be different theory definitions depending on different fields, they are still connected to the whole subject of theory. But it might be that it can be extended/adjusted to fit the problem of the particular field.
For example, in the field of research, and when it comes to research papers, one could categorize the theories used in them according to different theory types (such as explained in “The Nature of Theory in Information Systems”), and these fits the field of research better than the philosophy field.
I think you have grasped what the main objective of the week and the theme was and you summed this up i a clear and concise way. We also discussed the relation between philosophical and scientific theories and discussed how they are both based on something, but the difference is that philosophical theories are based on ideas while scientific theories are based on empirical data. What did you discuss? Did you come up with a different explanation?
SvaraRaderaHej,
SvaraRaderaVery impressive choice of paper. Grid technology sounds like a cool topic from your summary, even though I do not know anything about it, I have to admit. As you write in your reflection, you also spent some time researching journals and papers - I actually had the same problem that I spent way too much time on that. I also agree on your reflection on the tasks for this topic, that they were more practical - did you still have the feeling that you learned something by answering them? From your answers in your post, it mainly seems like you looked for definitions in the papers we read, to be honest, without transferring those findings to your own previous knowledge.
Hi!
SvaraRaderaI agree with you that theory was the main concept during this theme, how theory and hypothesis are two separate things was something which felt central to me. The fact that theory in science differs from theory in the casual setting is something I know I will take with me from this theme. Did you think about how theory relates to truth? I found discussions about that very interesting!
Keep up the good work!
Hi!
SvaraRaderaI read your pre blogpost on this theme. You did a good job on explaining your choice of paper, and it seems interesting to read. Although I felt it would have been interesting knowing more about your own thoughts regarding their choice of things such as methods , errors and so on. I totally agree with you on the important issue of the week being theory. In my seminar we also put a lot of time explaining the difference between hypothesis and theory. You have explained theory in a way I can easily understand and relate to! Keep up the good work!
It is great that you tell us what you thought of the week, it is interesting to see if others thought the same way. I agree with the practicality of this weeks assignment, it feel like you can use this knowledge out in the real world.
SvaraRaderaHi!
SvaraRaderaThank you for a short but succinct blog post with many interesting angles. I agree with you that this theme primarily was about understanding what theory is and theory is not. I think you in a clearly and good way explains the definition of what theory is. Good work!
/Paul
Like already mentioned in some other comments you could have focused more in depth on this week's questions. I also miss the discussion of the used theory of your chosen paper and your reflection on it. Moreover, you do not focus at all on the definition of truth in terms of theory. But I believe that it is a very important aspect of the definition of theory. Can a theory be true? And are there different definitions of truth, like an objective and a subjective truth? And which role does the context play in the definition of truth? I guess these might be some interesting causes for thought.
SvaraRaderaHi, your reflection is always short but incisive, enjoy reading your post. You wrote a very interesting opinion, which is to understand theory as a whole. I never think about it before, and didn't conclude this in my reflection. I feel your description of this is very reasonable. Good job!
SvaraRaderaHi,
SvaraRaderaThanks for sharing. Indeed different theory definitions depends on different fields, and you mention that they are still connected to the whole subject of theory, but it might be that it can be extended/adjusted to fit the problem of the particular field. I like this point, it is interesting to think about connections between theories. Good job!
Hi,
SvaraRaderaThanks for sharing. Indeed different theory definitions depends on different fields, and you mention that they are still connected to the whole subject of theory, but it might be that it can be extended/adjusted to fit the problem of the particular field. I like this point, it is interesting to think about connections between theories. Good job!