Introduction to Philosophy of the Natural Sciences (254-0-20)
Instructors
Axel Mueller
847/491-2558
Kresge 3-345
Meeting Info
Kresge Centennial Hall 2-430: Mon, Wed 9:30AM - 10:50AM
Overview of class
The course will introduce students to metaphysical and epistemological issues raised by modern natural science. We will be guided by nested "what does it take"-questions. For example: What does it take for natural science to be -in societies with a scientific culture—the legitimate authority on matters of fact about nature? What does it take for a system of assertions to count as a good scientific theory? What does it take for a scientific theory to be testable by evidence like observational and experimental data (and: what does it take for certain series of experiences to count as data, observations, experimental results?)? What does it take for a given theory to be better supported by the available evidence than its competitors? What does it take for a given theory to explain the known phenomena in an area of knowledge? What does it take for an explanatory scientific theory to be credited with reference to underlying structures of reality? We will begin with a brief overview of the scientific revolution of the 16th and 17 th century, and then turn to contemporary discussions on the problem of induction, the problem of the underdetermination of theory choice by the available data, the problem of rationality, the problem of realism. This will include reflecting on reasons philosophers of science have established against some common preconceptions about what it takes to be entitled to scientific objectivity, such as that science provides ‘proof', or that there is one simple, context-free ‘scientific method', or that scientific objectivity is free of considerations of values or informed judgment. Many contemporary doubt-manufacturers selectively use parts of such reasons to suggest the skeptical attitude that science produces just one among many optional beliefs about reality, and that others (like religion, or what serves the oil industry) are equally valid. Against this, we will see that the reasons against proof as the standard (and in favor of evidential support and fallibility) in fact don't weaken but instead strengthen the justifications of why we ought to trust scientifically formed belief where it and its institutional and social conditions are available more than any other (purported) sources of information on nature.
Learning Objectives
Having worked through the materials offered, students will... -be competent in the major paradigms and revolutions behind contemporary natural science -be able to identify, discuss and appreciate foundations of advanced scientific theories that use vocabulary referring to entities not observable by the human perceptual equipment -be able to conduct a formally correct argument articulating methodological and/or ontological and/or evaluative aspects of scientific work -Have gained an appreciation of the deep reach of human factors in scientific practice (like background understandings, relevance constraints, comparative judgments) of even the natural sciences, and thereby have acquired a sophisticated concept of scientific objectivity.
Evaluation Method
• Class and Section participation will be decisive in case of doubt, and can influence your grade up to 20%.
• One short paper (Midterm) should be ~1200 words long. It will count for ca. 30-35% for the final grade.
• One final paper should be ~2200-2500 words long. It will count for ca 45-8% for the final grade.
Class Materials (Required)
Godfrey-Smith, Peter: Theory and Reality, Chicago: Chicago UP, 2003. ISBN: 978-0226300634
Ladyman, James: Understanding Philosophy of Science, London/NY: Routledge, 2002. ISBN: 978-0415221573
Class Attributes
Ethical and Evaluative Thinking Foundational Disci
Ethics & Values Distro Area
Enrollment Requirements
Enrollment Requirements: Pre-registration for Philosophy and Science in Human Culture Majors and Minors