Phi 272 F11

Reading guide for Fri. 9/23: Hanson, “Observation” (KHR 339-351)
 
 

Norwood Russell Hanson (1924-1967) was of the same generation as Salmon and Putnam but died relatively young (when a plane he was flying crashed). These selections from the first chapter of his Patterns of Discovery address some of the same issues as Putnam but in a particularly striking and very influential way.

Hanson’s topic is commonly known via terms he used immediately following the end of the selection you have read when he said, “There is a sense, then, in which seeing is a ‘theory-laden’ undertaking. Observation of x is shaped by prior knowledge of x” (Patterns of Discovery, p. 19). Most of the selection is devoted to arguing against the view that what is theory-laden is not seeing or observation but something that comes after it.

In section A, Hanson argues that what is seen should not be identified with an image on the retina (which is clearly not theory-laden). The example of Tycho Brahe and Kepler will be relevant not only to Hanson’s argument here but also to a broader argument along similar lines you will encounter in Kuhn. (The odd phrase ‘sket ceterah’ on p. 342 is merely a typo; the original has the word ‘sketch’.)

Section B is devoted to attacking the idea that theory-ladenness is the result of an act of interpretation that is applied to what is seen. Particularly, important is the point he makes on pp. 343-344 when he notes occasions when we do interpret what we see but argues that the word interpretation “does not apply to everything.”

Hanson’s footnotes include a number of untranslated quotations. Most are from Ludwig Wittgenstein (1889-1951), whose thought strongly influenced Hanson, but one is from Goethe. Here are some translations.

n. 6: “But this isn’t seeing!” — “But this is seeing!” — It must be possible to give both remarks a conceptual justification.

n. 12: I can only see, not hear, red and green.

n. 18: What processes am I alluding to?

n. 28: Each hears only what he understands.