Topics for Discussion
Readings from Curd, Cover & Pincock unless otherwise specified
Science and Pseudoscience
What is science? How does science differ from other forms of knowledge? What are scientific theories, and how may they be distinguished from pseudoscience?
Richard Feynman's reflections on science provide useful background. See also here.
I also discussed the Kitzmiller v. Dover decision, online here.
Induction
What is inductive inference? Can it provide a sound basis for scientific knowledge?
- Staley Introduction to Philosophy of Science, Chp 1, 2
- Popper The Problem of Induction
- Lipton Induction
- Goodman The New Riddle of Induction
Theory and Observation
Observations are often said to confirm or refute scientific theories. But is the distinction between theory and observation so straightforward? Can observation settle disputes between theories, or is the choice always underdetermined?
- Staley Introduction to Philosophy of Science, Chp 3
- Duhem Physical Theory and Experiment
- Quine Two Dogmas of Empiricism
- Gillies The Duhem Thesis and the Quine Thesis
- Laudan Demystifying Underdetermination
- Staley Introduction to Philosophy of Science, Chp 8, 9
- Salmon Rationality and Objectivity in Science
- Mayo A Critique of Salmon's Bayesian Way
Science aims to be explanatory. But what is an explanation?
- Staley Introduction to Philosophy of Science, Chp 11
- Hempel Two Basic Types of Scientific Explanation
- Hempel The Thesis of Structural Identity
- Hempel Inductive Statistical Explanation
- Kitcher Explanatory Unification
- Woodward The Manipulability Explanation of Causal Explanation
- Weber, Van Bouwel, and De Vreese Scientific Explanation (free download on campus)
The more explanatory theories are, the more likely they are to be accepted as true. Why? Can this practice be justified?
Realism and Anti-realism
Can science give us knowledge of an unobservable reality? If it does, then how does it do so? If it does not, then how does it achieve objectivity? Is science really progressive and cumulative? Is there a scientific method responsible for this?
- Staley Introduction to Philosophy of Science, Chp 10
- Laudan A Confutation of Convergent Realism
- Mizrahi The pessimistic induction: A bad argument gone too far (if off campus, try here)
- Saatsi On the Pessimistic Induction and Two Fallacies
- Hacking Experimentation and Scientific Realism
- Oddie Truthlikeness Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (especially section 1.2)
Laws of Nature
Fundamental scientific principles are often called ‘laws of nature’. What does this mean? Are such ‘laws’ more than just accidental regularities?
- Ayer What is a Law of Nature?
- Dretske Laws of Nature
- Cartwright Do the Laws of Physics State the Facts?
Science and Values
What are the ethics of science? Should society restrict scientific research that questions its values? Do women do science differently than men?
Catastrophic Risk and the Simulation Argument
What are catastrophic risks? Might we be living in a computer simulation? How are these questions related?
Study Guide
Student-created partial study guide available here: PhilSci Study Guide .
Comments (3)
mmccord2008 said
at 4:14 pm on Sep 3, 2011
mmccord2008 said
at 4:25 pm on Sep 3, 2011
I read the introduction to the Kitzmiller decision. From what I see, the heart controversy seems to be whether the "establishment" clause of first ammendment is infringed. The issue of whether or not creation science is truly scientific seems somewhat secondary. Curd and cover strongly imply that the situation was such in the Arkansas cases; Judge overton was concerned primarily with the constitutionality of statute 590. I would contend that even if Overton had found "creation science" to be completely scientific, statute 590 still would have been struck down as unconstitutional. The scientific status of "creation science" is certainly an interesting topic for discussion, but I think the central issue in these legal battles was one of constitutional law.
Marjorie said
at 9:57 am on Sep 6, 2011
True. There seems to be a strict dichotomy between political and academic allegiance. From the political perspective, an overt expression of religious preference is unconstitutional. However, from the academic perspective, not providing the student with competing alternatives (even if these alternatives do not constitute real science) robs the student of a comprehensive education and opportunity for developing crucial, critical analysis skills.
You don't have permission to comment on this page.