Fall, 2006
Curtis Brown

This course will examine a number of philosophical issues about science. Among the issues we will discuss are these: (1) Demarcation. What distinguishes science from non-science, and real from bogus science? Is Creation Science science? Is parapsychology? Astrology? (2) Explanation. What is it to explain something? Does explanation require universal laws? Does it depend on context? (3) Validation. How are scientific theories validated or confirmed? Is validation a simple matter of gathering inductive support? Of making predictions that are born out by the evidence? Of trying but failing to falsify a theory? Or does it also depend on "pragmatic" matters such as the simplicity, elegance, or scope of the theory? (3) Values and Objectivity. Is science necessarily value-laden? To what extent does the intrusion of the values of the scientist diminish or make impossible objectivity in science? (4) Realism. Do highly theoretical entities really exist, or are they just fictions or useful tools for making predictions? Does science discover the truth about the real world, or create a world of its own? (5) Limits. Is science the only reliable method for finding out about the world? Are there any truths which are simply inaccessible to scientific method? (If so, is there any other method to which they are accessible?) (6) Philosophy and Particular Sciences. Depending on the interests and specialties of class members, we may also explore the philosophical implications of particular scientific results, e.g. the implications of sociobiology for ethics or of quantum physics for metaphysics.

TR 8:30 - 11:30. (I am usually in my office during office hours, but sometimes other commitments interfere; if you want to be certain I will be there, make an appointment with me. Other times can also be arranged by appointment.)

Martin Curd and J. A. Cover, ed., Philosophy of Science: The Central Issues (New York: Norton, 1998)

1. There will be a mid-term examination, tentatively scheduled for Wednesday, October 18. This exam will contain questions on the terminology and basic ideas of the readings, and longer essay questions asking you to evaluate and compare the readings. The mid-term will count 25% of the final grade.  (If you want to see what the mid-term was like last time around, you can look at an old mid-term review and old sample mid-term questions.  Keep in mind that these old materials provide only a rough idea of what the exam will be like, though.)

2. One substantial paper, of 10-15 pages, is due Monday, December 4. The paper should include discussion of some of the readings for the course; I will give you a longer handout about it soon. (This will probably closely resemble this old paper handout.)  I will ask you to give an oral presentation to the class on the topic of the paper during the latter part of the semester. The paper will count a total of 30% of the final grade. I will accept late papers, but the grade will be dropped one notch (e.g. from a B to a B- or from a B- to a C+) for every week day the paper is late. A paper proposal is due Wednesday, October 25.

3. There will be a final exam on Saturday, December 9, at 8:30 AM. The final will count 25% of the final grade.  You're welcome to look at an old final exam review and old final exam questions.  There's no guarantee the course will not be significantly different this time, but the old materials will give you some idea of the kind of thing to expect.

4. One-page papers will count 10% of the final grade. I would like you to write very short (1 page) essays on the reading material weekly. Every Monday during the semester unless there is no class or an exam or major paper is scheduled for that week, a 1-page paper on the reading for that week will be due. Sometimes I may ask you to write on a specific question; at other times you may write on whatever aspect of that week's reading you choose. Your principal objective in these essays should be to get clear about what is going on in the reading. This could involve explaining someone's argument, trying to figure out what he or she is arguing for, comparing one philosopher's views with those of another we have read, considering how the author might respond to possible questions, etc. These essays will be graded simply as (S) or unsatisfactory (U). At the end of the semester I will assign a letter grade as follows: anyone who has missed or received an unsatisfactory grade on 0 or 1 of the essays will receive an A; 2, B; 3, C; 4, D; 5 or more, F. These short essays must be turned in on time in order to receive credit. To receive a satisfactory grade, the paper must specifically address some aspect of the class reading for that week. Use page numbers when addressing specific points from the reading.

5. Attendance and participation will count 10% of the final grade. This portion of the grade will be based on attendance and participation in class; participation in the discussion board for the class; and class presentations. Each student in the class will be expected to lead class discussion at least three times during the semester, including a presentation on the topic of the final paper. Important note: Although in general participation counts 10% of the grade, excessive absence is grounds for a failing grade in the course, not just on this portion of the final grade.

All students are covered by a policy that prohibits dishonesty in academic work. Students who entered Trinity prior to the fall of 2004 are governed by the Academic Integrity Policy (AIP), while students who entered in the fall of 2004 or later are governed by the Academic Honor Code.

What counts as a violation of academic integrity is the same regardless of which policy you are governed by. The difference lies in the procedures for determining whether a violation has occurred and if so what the penalty will be. Under the Integrity Policy, the faculty member determines whether a violation has occurred as well as the punishment for the violation (if any) within certain guidelines. Under the Code, a faculty member will (or a student may) report an alleged violation to the Academic Honor Council. It is the task of the Council to investigate, adjudicate, and assign a punishment within certain guidelines if a violation has been verified.

Students who are under the Honor Code are required to pledge all written work that is submitted for a grade by writing, on the submitted work: “On my honor, I have neither given nor received any unauthorized assistance on this work,” followed by their signature. The pledge may be abbreviated “pledged” with a signature. For more details see the Honor Code web site.

You should be aware that I take academic integrity very seriously. Do not use any material you did not write yourself verbatim without enclosing it in quotation marks and giving a citation to the source. (This goes for individual sentences as well as larger chunks of prose.) Do not use close paraphrases of material you did not write yourself, period. Be aware that plagiarism is easier to detect than you might think. Other actions that violate academic integrity are listed in the "violations" section of the Honor Code website (the same description of violations also holds for the Academic Integrity Policy).

There is a detailed reading schedule online.

Demarcation (Science vs. Non-Science and Pseudoscience)

Explanation

Induction, Underdetermination, Confirmation

Science and Values: Ideology and Objectivity

Realism (Metaphysics)

Philosophical Issues Concerning Particular Sciences