Thesis question in an arts subject - proving something doesn't happen

Bolero · Oct 4, 2014

So, I come from a science background, and in that it is valid (though unexciting to be honest) to prove a negative. As in you have a hypothesis that x + y will give you z, but you then spend three years running equipment, looking at the data and you find that all you've proved is that x + y does not give you z. Now you do have an extensive thesis on the experimental methods, lots of data that shows you know how to operate the equipment, lots of analysis that shows you know how to analyse, but at the end of the day your original hypothesis has been disproved. Hopefully you've found out something else, but you may have just found that there is no link or pattern. From what I've seen/heard, in the main you will be awarded the PhD that you've worked for.

Is that true in arts subjects? As in if you start with a hypothesis and disprove it, do you still get a PhD from all the work you do on your thesis?

Bufty · Oct 4, 2014

This seems to me like trying to compare apples and oranges. Can you be more specific?

King Neptune · Oct 4, 2014

Logic tells us that a negative cannot be proven. One can demonstrate that one can find no evidence to support the existence of something, and one can prove that C is caused by B rather than by A, but one cannot prove that A does not exist.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proving_a_negative
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Negative_proof

"The negative proof fallacy is where one assumes something is true if it cannot be proven false."
http://logical-critical-thinking.com/logical-fallacy/negative-proof-fallacy/
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/why-isnt-it-possible-to-prove-a-negative.88411/

benbenberi · Oct 4, 2014

In short, no, it's not true. The arts don't work like that.

Different branches of the arts (humanities) have different expectations of a thesis. But the scientific method is generally not central -- often, not even vaguely relevant. A humanities dissertation typically starts not with a specific hypothesis to be proved, but a question to be answered/explored -- a more open-ended, less structured endeavor. Any answer to the question that is well-supported by research and argument appropriate to the discipline will be acceptable.

In the context of your header, "proving something didn't happen," as King Neptune says that's a logical impossibility. If your hypothetical arts student were a historian, she might indeed want to research a controversial event. For instance, did Richard III murder his nephews? She researches all the evidence that he did. She researches the conflicting evidence that he did not, and possibly delves deeper into alternative explanations that are also supported by evidence. In the end, she develops a thesis with an argument based on evidence that establishes some conclusion or other about the issue. For the purpose of the dissertation, the conclusion itself doesn't really matter -- the argument and the evidence are what's important.

veinglory · Oct 4, 2014

You certainly can support the null hypothesis. But an arts thesis is unlikely to be experimental with a formal hypothesis.

Bolero · Oct 4, 2014

Thanks folks. This is why I need arts input

.

In a limited sense you can prove a negative in science, providing you state the limits. As in if the question is "can I use this type of filter to separate these two named gases?" It can vary from no, to a bit, to near perfect. If you were to pose a wider question - can I use a filter to separate two gases, and the experimental sample was a specific filter and two specific gases and it didn't work, all you would have proved is no for that case. And if you then did more filters and more gases, and none of them worked, it is still just no for those cases. In the same way that if they all worked, it is still only yes for those cases and it doesn't say all filters will work for all gas mixtures.
And there is always the option that that particular experimenter couldn't do it, but the next one could because the first one mucked up.

Benbenberi - thanks that example particularly nailed it for me.

benbenberi · Oct 4, 2014

As they say, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

King Neptune · Oct 4, 2014

Bolero said:
And there is always the option that that particular experimenter couldn't do it, but the next one could because the first one mucked up.

And sometimes they keep mucking it up for decades or until some piece of equipment is invented that wasn't aroound the first time.

veinglory · Oct 4, 2014

Rejecting the alternative hypothesis experimentally is not about absence of evidence so long as you have provided the conditions the conclusion is being drawn about. It is about showing that A plus B equals NOT C, not about showing (generically) that there is no C.

Something not happening is an outcome just the same as something happening if the conditions are controlled. That is, concluding A plus B equals NOT C is just as sound as concluding A plus B equals C if you have full control over A and B and you cover all four options and their outcomes.

If this was not the case incorrect hypotheses would never be discarded.

kuwisdelu · Oct 4, 2014

veinglory said:
Rejecting the alternative hypothesis experimentally is not about absence of evidence so long as you have provided the conditions the conclusion is being drawn about. It is about showing that A plus B equals NOT C, not about showing (generically) that there is no C.

Something not happening is an outcome just the same as something happening if the conditions are controlled. That is, concluding A plus B equals NOT C is just as sound as concluding A plus B equals C if you have full control over A and B and you cover all four options and their outcomes.

If this was not the case incorrect hypotheses would never be discarded.

In practice, we often treat it that way for pragmatic reasons.

But mathematically and theoretically, it doesn't work like that.

You can only find evidence against the null hypothesis, not for it. You never "accept" the null hypothesis. You can only fail to reject it.

Of course, by that same theoretical framework, you can never really "prove" something either. You can only gather extremely strong evidence for it.

WeaselFire · Oct 4, 2014

Arts ain't science.

What art are you asking about? In general any of the creative or performing arts has a "thesis" that is actually an exhibition or performance. You hang your paintings in a gallery for judging, you screen a copy of your movie or perform the piece you wrote for left-handed trumpet. A Creative Writing "thesis" may be writing a novel.

Art History is usually a research project without a true hypothesis and proof, something along the lines of researching racial bias in art through the 18th century or religious connotations of oriental arts in the colonial era.

A MA degree as opposed to a MS degree can be a non-thesis degree and many are. You may want to do some research on the differences between thesis and non-thesis degrees. Many programs have a dissertation instead of a thesis, similar idea but a different pattern.

What do you actually need for your story?

Jeff

Gringa · Oct 4, 2014

what's your real question? I'm confused....

CynHolt · Oct 6, 2014

Thesis means different things to different people. In the "hard" sciences most students purport an hypothesis, run an experiment, collect data, and report the results/findings, as has been described before.

In the Humanities the student usually has an area of interest and they are to research the subject. Often there is no hypothesis, but there should always be a conclusion of the researcher. They will be judged on how thoroughly they accomplished their research in the area of interest and what kind of sources were used. Were they primary or secondary sources. Were any of the materials in another language? Who did the translation? That sort of thing.

Then there is the Fine Arts major. He or she is required to produce a product. Often a BFA is a five year degree. The last year is for producing the final thesis, usually a piece of art.

shaldna · Oct 6, 2014

Bolero said:
So, I come from a science background, and in that it is valid (though unexciting to be honest) to prove a negative. As in you have a hypothesis that x + y will give you z, but you then spend three years running equipment, looking at the data and you find that all you've proved is that x + y does not give you z. Now you do have an extensive thesis on the experimental methods, lots of data that shows you know how to operate the equipment, lots of analysis that shows you know how to analyse, but at the end of the day your original hypothesis has been disproved. Hopefully you've found out something else, but you may have just found that there is no link or pattern. From what I've seen/heard, in the main you will be awarded the PhD that you've worked for.

Is that true in arts subjects? As in if you start with a hypothesis and disprove it, do you still get a PhD from all the work you do on your thesis?

Yes, because you are proving your null hypothesis which you would have stated at the start of your thesis along with your hypothesis.

Ultimately it doesn't matter if you prove or disporve, the point of the work is to show that you can work at that level, the actual subject is of less importance than the ability to produce work of that standard.

ArtsyAmy · Oct 6, 2014

kuwisdelu said:
You can only find evidence against the null hypothesis, not for it. You never "accept" the null hypothesis. You can only fail to reject it.

Of course, by that same theoretical framework, you can never really "prove" something either. You can only gather extremely strong evidence for it.

This seems right to me. Thinking back to college statistics class... My understanding is that scientists decide the statistical standard by which they will believe something is "true," with the understanding that, although they repeat the test many times and get the same result, the possibility exists that they could be repeatedly seeing a false positive. That is to say, they look for results that are statistically significant, but understand that statistically significant is not the same as proof or truth.

I agree that we can't truly prove or disprove. I think it all comes down to faith--with scientific experiments, faith that the results are statistically significant enough to consider the results are true.

ArtsyAmy · Oct 6, 2014

kuwisdelu said:
You can only find evidence against the null hypothesis, not for it. You never "accept" the null hypothesis. You can only fail to reject it.

Of course, by that same theoretical framework, you can never really "prove" something either. You can only gather extremely strong evidence for it.

This seems right to me. Thinking back to college statistics class... My understanding is that scientists decide the statistical standard by which they will believe something is "true," with the understanding that, although they repeat the test many times and get the same result, the possibility exists that they could be repeatedly seeing a false positive. That is to say, they look for results that are statistically significant, but understand that statistically significant is not the same as proof or truth.

I agree that we can't truly prove or disprove. I think it all comes down to faith--with scientific experiments, faith that the results are statistically significant enough to consider the results are true.

Nualláin · Oct 6, 2014

Bolero said:
Is that true in arts subjects? As in if you start with a hypothesis and disprove it, do you still get a PhD from all the work you do on your thesis?

The discussion has more or less answered this, but I'll put it as succinctly as I can: a thesis in the humanities consists of a question, not the answer to it. So long as the student went about investigating his or her question in a thorough, logical and responsible manner, the project has been a success irrespective of what answer actually emerged.

kuwisdelu · Oct 6, 2014

ArtsyAmy said:
I agree that we can't truly prove or disprove.

That's not really true. We certainly can prove and disprove things, but not using the theoretical framework for statistical hypothesis testing.

For example, if you're null hypothesis is simply that something occurring is impossible, you only need to observe it once to prove that it is possible.

Most scientific hypotheses aren't so simple, though.

girlyswot · Oct 9, 2014

Not all non-science subjects are arts subjects. The social sciences, for example, will have a wide range of styles of PhD with different kinds of hypotheses/experiments/arguments acceptable.

CrastersBabies · Oct 9, 2014

Until we know exactly what arts, I think we're all going to be guessing.

Theses in the arts will range depending on the art. For my MFA, we had to produce a novel-length work of fiction (short story collection or part of a full novel). 150-ish pages. On top of that, we had to write 100 annotations. Each were a page long (single spaced) and had to do with analyzing craft elements in novels, short stories, essays, poetry, etc..

The annotations were all analytical. No hypothesis.

A literature degree, however, might require a theoretical hypothesis of some kind. A student will need to use evidence to support this.

Other liberal arts degrees might require research.

So, again, kind of need to know what type of arts.

Tulips · Oct 14, 2014

Bolero said:
So, I come from a science background, and in that it is valid (though unexciting to be honest) to prove a negative. As in you have a hypothesis that x + y will give you z, but you then spend three years running equipment, looking at the data and you find that all you've proved is that x + y does not give you z. Now you do have an extensive thesis on the experimental methods, lots of data that shows you know how to operate the equipment, lots of analysis that shows you know how to analyse, but at the end of the day your original hypothesis has been disproved. Hopefully you've found out something else, but you may have just found that there is no link or pattern. From what I've seen/heard, in the main you will be awarded the PhD that you've worked for.

Is that true in arts subjects? As in if you start with a hypothesis and disprove it, do you still get a PhD from all the work you do on your thesis?

What degree level and subject are you specifically asking about? In the US, a thesis is typically for a BA or MA whereas a PhD is a dissertation. The requirments for an arts or social science degree can vary depending on the discipline and even the university.

Bolero · Oct 15, 2014

Tulips said:
What degree level and subject are you specifically asking about? In the US, a thesis is typically for a BA or MA whereas a PhD is a dissertation. The requirments for an arts or social science degree can vary depending on the discipline and even the university.

I was working on the UK science model - so thesis = PhD - and I have a University in mind. I didn't know that the term "thesis" didn't universally = PhD.

I've just finished the first draft of my book and am re-reading, and the whole thesis side of it is something that evolved from a very minor item of background to something more important to the plot - and on re-reading I realised I'd strayed well outside my experience and was probably getting it wrong. It helps a lot to have it confirmed that yes, the concept that it is the skill with which you conduct the research that gets you the PhD does carry over.

I prefer not to go into any more details - but I'd like to say the discussion has been very useful to me, thank you everyone. Highlighted areas where I need to go and read - and have ordered books and am researching departmental websites for the University I have in mind. It is an Arts area where a written thesis with analysis is the norm - I've downloaded several to get more of a flavour for how investigations are done.

Also interesting about non-thesis Arts subjects - hadn't crossed my scientific experienced mind that you could get a PhD without writing a thesis - but for a performance art or physical art that makes perfect sense now it has been pointed out.

Once again, thank you all.

Thesis question in an arts subject - proving something doesn't happen

Bolero

Bufty

Where have the last ten years gone?

King Neptune

benbenberi

practical experience, FTW

veinglory

volitare nequeo

Bolero

benbenberi

practical experience, FTW

King Neptune

veinglory

volitare nequeo

kuwisdelu

Revolutionize the World

WeaselFire

Benefactor Member

Gringa

CynHolt

shaldna

The cake is a lie. But still cake.

ArtsyAmy

ArtsyAmy

Nualláin

kuwisdelu

Revolutionize the World

girlyswot

CrastersBabies

Burninator!

Tulips

Bolero