Philosophy of Science

PHL 327, Philosophy of the Social and Natural Sciences Dr. Poston

TR 11:00 – 12:15 Office: HUMB 124

Office Hours: MWF 1:15 to 2:15 & TR 12:30 to 1:30 Phone: 460-6248

Email: mylastname@jaguar1.usouthal.edu Spring 2008

Course Webpage: http://www.southalabama.edu/philosophy/poston/philscience.htm

Course Description: The philosophy of science is the examination of questions and issues that arise from the methods and results of science, questions and issues that are not themselves answerable by scientific methods. We shall focus on several central questions. (1) The demarcation issue: What distinguishes science from pseudoscience? Is Creation-Science science? Is astrology science? Is parapsychology science? (2) The issue of objectivity: Is science value-laden? To what extent does the intrusion of value diminish the objectivity of science? (3) The underdetermination problem & the Quine-Duhem thesis: Are scientific theories underdetermined by the data? What are the implications of this for scientific confirmation? (4) The problem of induction: Scientific reasoning is normally inductive: from the basis of certain data one infers a conclusion even though it’s possible that the conclusion is false. What justifies, if anything, inductive reasoning? (5) The Bayesian revolution: What is Bayesianism? How does the Bayesian framework explain scientific inquiry? (6) What is explanation? Scientific theories aim to explain phenomena. But when do we have a good explanation? What is the nature of explanation? When is one explanation of some phenomena better than another explanation? (7) The question of realism: Do theoretical entities really exist, or are they merely useful tools for making predications? Does science discover the truth about the world or does it create a world of its own?

Objectives:

To explore some of the philosophical issues raised by natural science.
To become acquainted with some of the major philosophers of science.
To develop the students’ writing skills.
To develop the students’ critical thinking skills. Such skills include being able to understand complex issues, detect presuppositions, evaluate arguments, and form reasoned judgments in both philosophy and everyday life.

Text:

Philosophy of Science: The Central Issues eds. Martin Curd & J.A. Cover (W.W. Norton & Company, 1998)

Evaluation: All written assignments should be emailed to me before class the day it is due. Please email the document in Word. I will return the document to you with comments, using Word’s comment function. It’s best if you have Word 2003 or above. If you don’t know how to display comments in Word, talk to me after class and I’ll show you how to do this.

Reading Summaries 30%
Quizzes 10%
Oral Midterm 10%
Final Exam 20%
Argumentative Paper 20%
Attendance & Participation 10%

Reading Summaries

A reading summary consists of (i) a statement of the author’s thesis, that is, what he is arguing for or against. Occasionally this may include more than one statement. Also, sometimes you will have to paraphrase the author’s thesis. Reading summaries also include (ii) a sketch of the author’s main argument for his thesis. In the remainder of the summary (remember you have at most 500 words) explain the rationale of the major premises and any problems you see with the author’s argument.

Some of our readings will be difficult. However, it should be fairly easy to get the main gist of the article. For instance, if an article is on Bayesianism you should be able to determine whether the author is in favor of Bayesianism or against it. In cases where you don’t know what the article is getting at, just say that and try to explain some of the sources of your bafflement.

These summaries are intended to encourage you to wrestle with these readings. Each essay is central to the development of the philosophy of science and deserves careful scrutiny. Writing on an article forces you to be clear about your reaction to the article and your sense of what the author has accomplished. These summaries are also intended to improve your ability to write on and explain complicated issues.

There will be 10 article summaries (500 word limit). They will be graded as follows:

5 = excellent
4 = good
3 = so-so
2 = poor
1 = extremely poor
0 = no effort at all
40-50 total points correlates with an A
30-40 total points correlates with a B
25-30 total points correlates with a C
15-25 total points correlates with a D
0-15 total points correlates with an F

Quizzes

We will have 10 quizzes, some may be unannounced. The quizzes will cover aspects of our reading and lectures. For instance, I may ask you to explain the difference between cognitive and contextual values. Or I might ask you to give a form of Bayes’ theorem. These quizzes are intended to test your comprehension of basic and central elements in the readings. If you do the reading, come to class, and get the basics then you should do well on these quizzes.

Oral Midterm

We will talk about this when the date approaches.

Final Exam

The final exam will be cumulative. It will include both an objective part—multiple choice, true/false, and short answer—and an essay section.

Argumentative Paper

You shall formulate a thesis statement, argue for it, and defend it from possible objections. Your discussion should manifest a good understanding of the relevant literature—you’ll gain this understanding from our readings and class discussion. I will give you a list of topics. Before you begin writing confirm your topic with me. If you would like to pursue a different topic than one I have given then discuss it with me. The paper shall be no more than 2000 words. Use footnotes with standard documentation practices (e.g., MLA).

Statement of Grading Criteria:

A : the essay adequately states and defends an argument, and answers the counterexamples and counter arguments suggested by the lectures and the readings; it shows knowledge of the topic, is well structured and well written.
B: the essay contains an argument, it shows a satisfactory knowledge of the subject, but it does not account for all the counter examples and counter arguments suggested by the readings and the lectures. The main claims are not adequately supported by textual evidence.
C: The essay states an argument or thesis, but its supporting premises are missing, or incorrect, or not sufficiently specific. It is not well structured and it is poorly written
D: The essay makes no serious attempt to frame an argument or defend a thesis. It simply describes the readings or lectures, and includes several errors. It fails to address the question posed, it lacks structure, and it is poorly written.
F: The essay completely ignores the questions set, or it contains very serious errors in reasoning, and shows no knowledge of the subject. /The essay is incomprehensible due to errors in language and usage./ The essay violates the requirements of academic integrity

Attendance & Participation

Attendance and participation are crucial. Each lecture will introduce new concepts. Moreover, this class is a mix of lecture and discussion. The lectures will not only set the context for the readings, but also explain the arguments and ideas supporting various positions. The task of evaluating these arguments and ideas, though, will be a joint venture. As a result, we will spend much of our time discussing the reasoning behind certain positions. The participation grade measures the quality of your input. But if you don’t attend you can’t participate. Additionally, I will adhere to the following attendance policy:

2 or fewer unexcused absences 10/10
3 unexcused absences: 8/10
4 unexcused absences: 6/10
5-6 unexcused absences: 4/10
More than 6 unexcused absences: 0%
Being late to class counts as ½ absence; after being late 4 times it counts as an absence

Schedule: (This schedule is subject to change. Pay attention to current schedule on website)

	Section	Reading Schedule	Summaries & Quizzes
Tuesday, January 08	Introduction	Introduction
Thursday, January 10	Demarcation	Popper, Kuhn, Lakatos (C&C 3-26)
Tuesday, January 15	Demarcation	Thagard, Ruse, Laudan, Ruse (C&C 27-61)	Quiz 1
Thursday, January 17	Values	Kuhn (C&C 86-101)	Summary 1 due on Kuhn pp. 86-101
Tuesday, January 22	Values	Kuhn (C&C 102-118)	Quiz 2
Thursday, January 24	Values	McMullin & Laudan (C&C 119-169)	Summary 2 due on Laudan pp. 139-169
Tuesday, January 29	Values	Longino, Okruhlik (C&C 170-219)
Thursday, January 31	Underdetermination	Vienna Circle, Duhem (C&C 257-279)l	Quiz 3 on the Vienna Circle
Thursday, February 07	Underdetermination	Quine (C&C 280-301)
Tuesday, February 12	Underdetermination	Gillies (C&C 302-319)	Summary due 3on Gillies pp. 302-319
Thursday, February 14	Underdetermination	Laudan (C&C 320-353)	Quiz 4 on Laudan article
Tuesday, February 19	Induction	Hume Section 4 of the Enquiry	Summary 4 due on Hume pp. 10-17
Thursday, February 21	Induction	Popper, Salmon (C&C 426-444)	Quiz 5
Tuesday, February 26	Review for Midterm	Review for Midterm	Review for Midterm
Thursday, February 28	Midterm	Midterm	Midterm
Tuesday, March 04	Induction	Hempel, Snyder (C&C 445-480)	Summary 5 due on Hempel pp. 445-460
Thursday, March 06	Induction	Achinstein (C&C 481-493) & Brueckner’s PPQ paper (optional)	Quiz 6
Tuesday, March 18	Bayesianism	Swinburne Ch 3 “Probability”
Thursday, March 20	Bayesianism	Swinburne Ch 4 “The Criteria of Logical Probability”
Tuesday, March 25	Bayesianism	Commentary (C&C 627-638)	Quiz 7
Thursday, March 27	Bayesianism	Salmon (C&C 551-583)	Summary 6 on Salmon
Tuesday, April 01	Bayesianism	Glymour (C&C 584-606)	Quiz 8
Thursday, April 03	Bayesianism	Horwich (C&C 607-624)	Summary 7 on Horwich
Tuesday, April 08	Explanation	Carnap, Hempel (C&C 678-694)	Quiz 9
Thursday, April 10	Explanation	Hempel (C&C 695-719)	Summary 8
Tuesday, April 15	Explanation	Ruben (C&C 720-745)	Quiz 10
Thursday, April 17	Explanation	Railton (C&C 746-765)	Summary 9
Tuesday, April 22	Laws	Ayer (C&C 808-825)
Thursday, April 24	Laws	Dretske (C&C 826-845)	Summary 10
Tuesday, April 29	Final Exam 10:30-12:30	Final Exam 10:30-12:30