|
PHL 215 Science & Inquiry: Spring 2008
William H. Krieger, Ph.D.
Class #6570 (sec 1) Tues/Thurs 8-9:15am Chafee 219
Class #6571 (sec 2) Tues/Thurs 2-3:15pm White 204
Office Hrs: Tues 9:30-11:30am Chafee 172
Phone: 401-874-2812 Email: krieger@uri.edu
Goals:
What is science and how exactly does it work? What makes something like astronomy a "science," but astrology something else? What do scientists mean when they talk about a scientific theory or a scientific law? These questions and others fall under the purview of the "philosophy of science" and during this course, we will talk about the impact of science on our attempts to gather knowledge.
We will begin by trying to define science, and by considering what people have tried to establish as the minimum criteria of science.
After this introduction, we will consider some 20th century views of science: Carl Hempel's classic characterization of science, an exemplar of the Logical Positivist/Empiricist movement (and essentially the ‘science’ that you learned about in high school), will be our starting point. We will then pit Hempel’s vision against a number of critiques of the scientific status quo in order to try to better understand what science is.
Finally, we will use our ideas about science to evaluate parapsychology. Our answers to questions about its nature will lead us full circle (but hopefully, not into a vicious cycle).
Schedule:
Introduction: What is/isn’t Science? The Traditional Position and Its Critics
Some Basic Terminology, The Scientific Method?
Schlick and Vaughn “Science and its Pretenders”
Hempel “PNS” & Hempel/Oppenheim
Scriven “Explanations, Predictions, and Laws”
Cartwright “The Truth Doesn’t Explain Much”
Other Models of Scientific Explanation and Confirmation
Popper “Science: Conjectures and Refutations”
Kuhn “The Structure of Scientific Explanations”
Lakatos “Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes”
Feyerabend “How to Defend Society against Science”
Kosso “Science and Objectivity”
Feminist/Outside Critiques of Science
Jaggar “The Myth of Dispassionate Investigation”
Ginzberg “Uncovering Gynocentric Science
Keller “A Feeling for the Organism”
Maffie “To Walk in Balance”
Case Study: Parapsychology
Thouless “Parapsychology during the Last Quarter of a Century”
Radner and Radner “Parapsychology: Pre-Paradigm Science”
Movie: Parapsychology as non-science
Texts:
Arthur Zucker, Introduction to the Philosophy of Science ISBN 0-02-432104-4
Additional Readings (available via electronic reserve as PDF files)
Grading Scale:
Students will be graded on the following criteria/scale:
1/3 Discussion Questions
These will be short (usually 1-2 paragraphs.) I will grade them on a 1-10 point scale (10 = best.) I will use these questions as a source of discussion material in class and as a way to focus your attention on some points of interest in the articles.
1/3 Paper 1 – Tentative date: Tuesday, Feb 26th
I'll provide a list of topics shortly, but all will relate to questions about traditional ideas about the nature of and criteria of science. I am happy to read drafts, which will be due 1 week before the paper due date.
1/3 Final
Option 1: Paper – (Finals Week begins May 2nd)
This paper will focus on issues surrounding contemporary problems and issues in the philosophy of science.
Option 2: Presentation (set this up with me sooner rather than later)
Lead a class, either on one of the articles I have listed, or on something related that is more to your liking.
General Information:
Remember, I am here to help. Please do come see me if you have questions, if you want to talk about the material, or if your blood caffeine levels are dropping. Email and phone are also great ways to contact me. I went into this field because I love it, so I am happy to chat about this stuff.
Philosophy courses are not the sorts of things you will want to miss. So, I expect that you will come to class. Religious holidays/real excuses are the only exceptions to this rule, and I expect to be informed of these as soon as they are known.
Late work will only be accepted if there are severe extenuating circumstances, and I expect that you will inform me in advance and arrange to hand in late work A.S.A.P.
Plagiarism: don't do it. Copying somebody’s work (either in full or by paraphrase) without citing the author of that material is against both school and federal laws. If you use a source, cite it. If you have questions about this, ask me.
DO THE READING. We will be discussing a number of ideas that were originally found in articles written for professional journals. As a result, this dense and/or technical work will be challenging (and sometimes frustrating).
The payoff? This is great stuff. I am looking forward to working with you.
|