Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Phl sci 2010_final
Phl sci 2010_final
Phl sci 2010_final
Phl sci 2010_final
Phl sci 2010_final
Phl sci 2010_final
Phl sci 2010_final
Phl sci 2010_final
Phl sci 2010_final
Phl sci 2010_final
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Phl sci 2010_final

519

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
519
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE PHL of SCI Fall 2010 Time and class room schedule: TBA Nyamsuren Tserennadmid, Department of Social Sciences and Humanities Mission: To develop the student’s ability to evaluate and analyze philosophical arguments and practices within field of philosophy of science. Objective: This course will survey the key themes, arguments and methods in philosophy of science. The focus will be on how science works. We will investigate such questions as: What is science? How is a scientific theory justified? What are justification, evidence, testing, and theory choice? How do scientific theories relate to our practical problems? Teaching philosophy: The class uses progressive teaching methods, designed to help students engage with the important but challenging questions of philosophy. I will run the first week primarily in the form of lectures. The rest will be run as interactive discussion sessions. As a teacher of philosophy, I want my students to gain a proper knowledge of the nature of fundamental philosophical questions in the field of science, to appreciate the importance of the search for the answers to such questions, and to be aware of their own philosophical views at the end of my course. Reflecting on these basic issues, and so improving analytic skills and critical thinking, is at the core of philosophy of science. My teaching philosophy will involve a strong interdisciplinary perspective. So, I invite some professors in this course who specialized in their own field of investigation. In addition to the kind of participation I have spoken about above, my students have to submit written material in order to learn to express themselves clearly and coherently, showing their reflective thinking and a good grasp of the course content and the meanings of technical and abstract concepts. Contact Information: Nyamsuren Ts, MA in Philosophy Office: 326 extension Office Hours: TBA Email: narnud@hsum.edu.mn Required texts 1. Godfrey-Smith, Peter (2003) Theory and Reality. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (PGS) 2. Kuhn, Thomas K. (1996) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 3rd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • 2. Recommended text 1. Cover, J.A, Curd, Martin (1998) Philosophy of Science: The Central Issues. W. W. Norton & Company, Inc. (C&C) Additional course readings will be posted on e-office. Requirements/Grading: 1. Attendance (10%): You get full 10% in advance. Any absences earn -1%, but absences due to accountable reasons are excused. 2. Class presentation (10%): You will be responsible for leading one class presentation. This will consist of a brief (up to 5 minutes) presentation of main issues of assigned reading. The presentation schedule will be organized during the first week of classes. 3. Written submission (30%): This will be one short paper (-5pp, typewritten and double-spaced in a 12 point font) on key issues from course readings. As your grade in this course depends strongly on the written submission, you should work hard to make your assignments as clear, complete, and accurate as possible. First and foremost, your writing must meet university standards. This criterion means that you must express yourself clearly and coherently, showing a good grasp of the course content and the meanings of technical and abstract words. The mechanics of your writing, including grammar and spelling, must be sound. 4. Midterm exam (50%): There will be an in-class exam at end of course. The exam will consist of key questions on major topics discussed in class. A list of topics and sample questions will be distributed in advance. Course policies and guidelines: • Disability: Any student with a disability requiring accommodations in this course should contact me after class or during office hours within the first two weeks of the semester. All such discussions will be as confidential as possible. • Plagiarism: Plagiarism is defined as quoting or paraphrasing another person’s words without proper acknowledgment. Paraphrasing includes changing word order, changing grammatical structure, omitting or adding sentences. Proper acknowledgment means using a citation to indicate where you make use of another person’s words or ideas. Plagiarism is not defined by the intent to plagiarize, but by the fact of presenting another’s words or ideas as if they were one’s own. So it is no defense to say that one did not mean to plagiarize. If you are unsure how to correctly cite a source, please consult me or an academic advisor. Teaching Methods Used in the Course: Lecture method: This is the most widely used form of presentation. Lectures are used for introduction of new subjects, summarizing ideas, showing relationships between theory and practice, and reemphasizing main points. Group learning method: Group learning is an instructional strategy which organizes students into small groups so that they can work together to maximize their own and each other's learning. The most significant characteristic of group learning is that it continually requires active participation of the student in the learning process.
  • 3. Guided discussion method: In the guided discussion method, as is true with any group learning effort, the instructor typically relies on the students to provide ideas, experiences, opinions, and information. Fundamentally, the guided discussion method is almost the opposite of the lecture method. The instructor's goal is to draw out what the students know, rather than to spend the class period telling them. All members of the group should follow the discussion.
  • 4. Schedule of Topics and Readings: Week 1 Philosophy and science We aim to acquire a deep understanding of how philosophical theories influence proper scientific enquiries and vise versa, and learn the essential features of several important scientific theories. Topic One: Introduction Key points: •Distinctive features of philosophy •Nature of science •A very short history of science •Connection between philosophical ideas and scientific discoveries •The field of philosophy of science •Philosophical questions that arise within particular sciences Key questions: • What is science and how does it work? • What makes science different from other ways of investigating the world? • Is science influenced by philosophical world-views, historical, political and social conditions? • How are the various sciences related to one another? • Discuss the good opportunities for cross-fertilization, borrowing, and joint work in the scientific field Randall, Jr., John Herman (1976) The Making of the Modern Mind. Toulmin, Stephen Edelston, and June Goodfield (1962) The Fabric of the Heavens. New York: Harper Topic Two: Theories of science Key points: • Scientific status • Science versus pseudoscience • Scientific and unscientific knowledge • Scientific revolutions • Abstract structure of scientific theories • Descriptive and normative theories Key questions: • What are the most common criteria for science? • Is there a set of rules or procedures that scientists do or should follow? • What is the logical structure of science?
  • 5. • What are the main ideas of the three most important theories of science? PGS Ch1 ‘Introduction’ (1-18), Ch10 ‘Naturalistic philosophy’ (149-55) C&C Introduction; Imre Lakatos 'Science and pseudoscience' (20-27), Michael Ruse 'Creation-science is not science' (38-48) Week 2 Logical positivism and the growth of scientific knowledge We aim to understand the central ideas of logical positivism, some critical objections to these ideas and alternatives, placing all these issues in historical context. Topic Three. Central ideas of logical positivism and objections to it Key points: • Brief introduction to empiricism in general • The Vienna Circle • Analytic/synthetic distinction • The verifiability theory of meaning, verification principle as means of observation • Logic as the main tool for philosophy • Inductive logic • Some objections: Karl Popper’s objection, A.J.Ayer’s objection, objections from W.V.O.Quine and Thomas Kuhn Key questions: • How do you understand the different types of empiricist theories? • What were the main claims put by The Vienna Circle? • Briefly discuss the central ideas of logic positivists. • Explain verification principle. • Do you agree with the objection from Karl Popper against logical positivism? Explain why you agree with or don’t. • Do you agree with the objection from A. J. Ayer against logical positivism? Explain why you agree with or don’t. • Do you agree with the objections from W.V.O. Quine and Thomas Kuhn against logical positivism? Explain why you agree with or don’t. PGS Ch2 ‘Logic plus empiricism’ (19-37) Garrett, Don, and Edward Barbanell. (1997) Encyclopedia of Empiricism. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press Topic Four. From Popper to Feyerabend Key points: • Problem of demarcation: distinguishing science from pseudo-science • Falsification principle, confirmation as a myth • Objections to Popper on falsification and confirmation
  • 6. • “Paradigm” • Normal science, and its anomaly or crisis • Revolution • “Hard core” • “Protective belt” • Principles of scientific change • “Anything goes” • Methodological anarchism Key questions: • How do you define a concept of “demarcation”? • What are the merits and demerits of the “Falsification Principle”? • Do you agree with the objections Popper’s Principle of Falsification? • Compare Popper’s principle of falsification with verification in logical positivism. • What are the main concepts of Kuhn’s theory? • Discuss Kuhn’s theory about scientific knowledge dynamic • What does Lakatos mean by “hard core”, “protective belt”? • How do you understand principle of “methodological anarchism” in Feyerabend’s theory? Do you agree with this principle? PGS Chapters 4-7 (57-117) Kuhn (1996) Chapters III-IX (23-92) Week 3 Induction, observation, and evidence We will learn about the method of induction and the problems related it, with emphasis on the views of David Hume and Karl Popper. We will also learn the basic ideas of Bayes’ theorem and its role in assessing evidence. Topic Five: Induction and problems of induction Key points: • Inductive confirmation of theories • Deductive logic vs. inductive logic • Discussion of induction by Hume • The Paradox of the Ravens • New riddle of induction • The problem of Induction by Karl Popper Key questions: • How do observations provide evidence for a theory? • What is Hume’s view of induction? • Define deductive reasoning and inductive reasoning. • Explain the ravens problem.
  • 7. PGS Ch3 ‘Induction and confirmation’ (39-56) C&C Ch4: Peter Lipton 'Induction' (412-426), Karl Popper 'The problem of induction' (426-433) Topic Six: Observation, evidence, and probability Key points: • Confirmation or evidence • Understanding evidence using probabilities: Probability and its basic theorems, Bayes theorem, P(h)+P(not-h)=1, hypothesis-h, evidence-e • Updating a hypothesis with a evidence • Comparing probabilities of hypotheses with reference to their evidence Key questions: • What is a probability? (Different interpretations) • What is Bayes’ theorem? • What is the relationship between hypothesis and evidence? • How should one update the probability of a hypothesis in the light of evidence? PGS 10.3 ‘The theory-ladenness of observation’ (155-162) PGS Ch14 ‘Bayesianism and modern theories of evidence’ (202-214) C&C Ch4: Carl G. Hempel 'Criteria of confirmation and acceptability' (445-460), Laura J. Snyder 'Is evidence historical?' (460-481) Week 4 Experiment and theory We aim to obtain knowledge of the different kinds of models and representations used in science and to understand the similarity and difference among them; to learn the basic ideas of covering law theory of explanation and basics of experiment. Topic Seven: Experiment, models, and reality Key points: • Representation and reference • Representational “vehicles”: ordinary language and its technical extensions, other models including mathematical • Mathematical models and hypotheses expressed in ordinary language Key questions: • What is a representation? • What is reference? • What are the different kinds of representational “vehicles”? • What are the main differences between models and linguistically expressed theories?
  • 8. C&C Ch3: Pierre Duhem 'Physical theory and experiment' (257-280) PGS Ch12 §7 ‘Representation, models and truth’ (186-189) Topic Eight: Structure and explanation of theory Key points: • Covering law theory of explanation • Explanandum-“Why-X”, Explanans- “Why-Y” • “D-N” theory is a deductive form of covering law explanations • Asymmetry problem • Directionality of explanation and prediction Key questions: • What is an explanandum? • What is an explanans? • Explain the basic ideas of covering law theory of explanation. • What is wrong with the covering law explanation? Use an example to illustrate. • The covering law theory sees explanation as very similar to prediction. Explain PGS Ch13 ‘Explanation’ (190-200) C&C Ch6: Rudolf Carnap 'The value of laws: explanation and prediction' (678-685), Carl G. Hempel 'Two basic types of scientific explanation' (685-695) Written submission due end of week 4 Week 5 Naturalism and Realism We will investigate the “naturalist” and “realist” approach to science, exploring process, structure, and reward system of science. Topic Nine: Naturalistic philosophy in theory and practice Key points: • Doing philosophy with science • Connection between scientific and philosophical theories • Science is a resource for philosophy • Normative naturalism • Doing with the relations between different sciences • Scientific picture of the world and the reality • Theory choice • Science as structural • Reward system in science Key questions:
  • 9. • Are there the general philosophical foundations for science? • What would be the results from value judgment based on instrumental rationality in the scientific scene? • Is there theory-free observation? If yes, how successful in science making? • What is the suggestion from the Muller-Lyer illusion? • Is science fundamentally cooperative, or is it fundamentally competitive? • What about the possibility that ‘pie’ divided equally? PGS Chapters 10-11 (149-172) Topic Ten: Scientific Realism Key points: • Common sense realism • Product of settlement of scientific controversy • Optimistic and pessimistic version of scientific realism • Accuracy of our current scientific theories • The oppositions to scientific realism • Theories that empirically adequate • Living inside the theories • Accurate representation of the world Key questions: • Can science describe the real structure of the world? • Is the world as described by science real? • What would happen when the best-established theories turn out to be wrong? • How science developed? • Discuss the oppositions to realism • What is position of Bas Van Fraassen? PGS Ch12 ‘Scientific realism’ (173-186) C&C Ch9: Bas C. van Fraassen 'Arguments concerning scientific realism' (1064-1088), Ian Hacking 'Experimentation and scientific realism' (1153-1169) Week 6 Suggestions from humanities We aim to learn the essentials of hermeneutics, phenomenology, structuralism, deconstruction, feminism, postmodernism to develop skills in interpreting the meaning, and to understand the postmodern condition and its importance to scientific inquires. Topic Eleven: Hermeneutics and phenomenology Key points: • The hermeneutic circle and triangle • Divination
  • 10. • Relationship between language and understanding • Understanding as a practical know-how • Understanding as application • Intentionality • Reduction • Noesis and Noema Key questions: • Is it possible to get out of the hermeneutic circle? If yes, how? • Discuss the importance of interpretation in medicine? • What is phenomenology? • Use an example for phenomenological investigation in particular science Topic Twelve: Structuralism, Deconstruction, Feminism, and Postmodernism Key points: • Defining the structure • Binary opposition • Deconstruction • Gendered knowledge • Feminist science • Diversity of viewpoint • Challenge of value-neutrality • Science in postmodern age • Story telling in science • Legitimation of knowledge Key questions: • What is main claim by structuralism and deconstruction? • Are there any possibilities for deconstruction in practice of medicine? • Do women have different style of theorizing or reasoning that derives from their different experience? • Discuss the pragmatics of scientific knowledge • What is the principle of postmodern knowledge? PGS Ch9 ‘Feminism and Science Studies’ (136-148) Jean-Francois Lyotard 'The postmodern condition' Ch7 'The pragmatics of scientific knowledge' (23-27), Ch13 'Postmodern science as the search for instability' (53-60)

×