Philosophy of Science
Syllabus
Spring term 2005
Kalamazoo College
Steve Petersen
$Revision: 1.4 $
Philosophy of Science meets Mondays and Wednesdays 10-11:35am and
Fridays 10-10:40am in Olds / Upton 112 103.
Course description
This course will cover some of the major problems of the philosophy of
science, such as:
- How do we determine what kind of investigation counts as
scientific? (Why does astronomy count as a science, but
astrology doesn't? Does creationism count as a science? How about
evolutionary biology? Why?)
- What is an explanation? What is a scientific law?
For example, what does it mean to say the law of gravity
explains the motion of the planets?
- How do we choose between two theories that fit the data
equally well? Is there, for example, a good reason to prefer the
simpler one? What is it for a theory to "fit data",
anyway?
- Can we set aside our aims and values when we try to describe the
world scientifically, or are they inextricably mixed into our
conclusions? In what sense is science "objective"?
- Given that all our past scientific theories have been wrong,
do we have any reason to think the ones we have now are even close to
right?
- What is it for a theory (like Einstein's) to be "closer" to the
truth than another (like Newton's)? Is truth actually the goal of
scientific practice, in the first place? Or does science "merely" aim
for pragmatic efficacy in achieving our other goals?
These questions are designed to question the fundamental assumptions
of science and scientific practice. We will read mostly contemporary
authors on these issues; classes will be a mixture of lecture and
active discussion.
Class goals
Let me expand a bit on the goals outlined in the section above. One
way to organize the class goals is around three separate areas:
- knowledge goals: to learn the major philosophical debates we
study, and the various positions on them, and the various objections
to these positions.
- skills goals: to become adept at reason-giving,
argumentation, and appreciating opposed positions; to get in the habit
of critically evaluating the assumptions of science.
- values goals: to value reasons, inquisitiveness, and
open-mindedness; to value scientific practice as a paragon of
empirical reasoning.
To reach these goals, I plan both to challenge and to
support you in equal measure. Do not be afraid to ask for
either when you don't feel you're getting it.
Notice that the skills and values goals are at least as important as
the knowledge goals, and this will be reflected in my grading.
Achieving these goals is likely to require more interactive learning
than you are used to. You can no longer afford simply to read and
regurgitate -- at least, not for a good grade. You must engage the
material yourself. This requires taking more responsibility for your
own learning than you might be used to. Remember, though: I'm here to
help you take this responsibility.
Contact information
The best way to reach me is by email, which is just petersen
(at kzoo.edu, of course). You can also try calling me in my
office, 337-7040, but I rarely check my voicemail. As a last
resort, and with a good excuse, you can call me at home:
978-6876. You had better not call before 9am or after 11pm. My
office hours are Mondays 3-4p, and Wednesdays 3-5p. My office
is 212 Humphrey House (in the English department). You can also make
appointments with me when my office hours don't work for you.
Text
We'll be using an anthology called Introductory Readings in the
Philosophy of Science, edited by Klemke, Hollinger, and Rudge
(with Kline), 3rd edition. You should be able to buy it at the campus
bookstore, or at half.com for example.
There will also be some additional class readings and other "virtual handouts" from me. In general
it will be important to follow the development of the class
website,
http://kzoo.edu/~petersen/teaching/phil-science.html
I will use this spot to post announcements, assignments, class notes,
handouts, syllabus changes, etc.
Requirements and grading
Requirements
- 3p paper, 15%
- midterm exam, 15%
- 6p paper, 25%
- final exam, 30%
- section participation, including written questions, 15%
You must do every assignment by the last day of exams in order to
pass the class. The 3p paper will be an expository paper on an
argument and an objection. You will be given a chance to rewrite this
paper for a better grade. The 6p paper will include your own thoughts
on an issue; you will not be able to rewrite it. With special
permission from me in advance, upperclass students can write one
10p paper instead of the two shorter papers. If you write the 10p
paper, a draft or outline will be due when the 3p paper is due.
The general expectation for a class with almost 4 class-hours is that
you will spend about, and on average, another 8 outside of
class each week, and my syllabus is designed to reflect this. Though
the readings tend to be short relative to other classes, the material
is very dense, so that you'll need to spend a lot of time on each
page. For the kind of understanding required in this class, you will
almost surely have to read each assignment at least twice.
(And yes, that is already adjusting for the fact that you're smart!)
In other words, I am giving you some break on the amount of material
required, but with the expectation of greater rigor with the
material assigned.
Grading
Since many students ask me about it, I'll tell you now how I determine
grades: I give you a percentage score on all your assignments. For
each major assignment I will give a rough idea of what the
letter-grade curve would be ("about 83 and above was an A for this
paper", etc.). In the end though, only the numbers
count (so for example a high B+ will count more than a low B+ in
the final reckoning). I normalize all these numbers using standard
deviations. After all grades are in, I weigh them by the proportions
above on my spreadsheet to get final normalized statistics. I then
use the spreadsheet to order these numbers from highest to lowest,
without looking at the names associated with the numbers. I
then decide "natural" cutoff points for an A, an A-, a B+, etc.,
guided in part by the statistics and in part by my gut. Finally, I
look at the names associated with borderline cases (if any) and let my
intuition guide me.
This is a deliberate mix of curved and absolute grading that I think
is most fair. This way it is possible for almost everyone to get A's
-- or, for that matter, for almost everyone to get to get C's and D's
-- something impossible with precisely curved grading. Your grades
thus don't depend entirely on the skill of your classmates. But, this
way, I also don't have to pretend to know exactly the level of
understanding required for each grade, as absolute grading presumes.
Instead, if for example I teach at too high a level, I can still give
better grades to those who did relatively well. In
practice, the grades almost always curve around a B- mean.
I will grade the second paper and both exams blindly; I won't
grade the first blindly because I want to give you an opportunity to
bring in drafts. For papers I use a grading rubric that is somewhat
open-ended and flexible (not to say "generic"); I will make it
available by the time the first paper is assigned.
Late assignments
The philosophy department's policy on late assignments is this:
- Up to 24 hours late: one half-grade off (in my class, I
approximate this by a loss of 3 points)
- 24 hours to two weeks late: one full grade off (in my class, a
loss of 6 points)
- After two weeks: failure for the assignment
Grade changes
Of course you should feel comfortable asking me about your grades, or
pointing out mistakes in my grading. I'm open to the idea that I
might have made a mistake! But I've also found that this openness can
be abused. So here is my policy on grade-change requests:
- Unless it's a straightforward mistake (on an exam, say) you
must submit your explanation for exactly why you deserve a
better grade in writing (email is fine). We might then make an
appointment to discuss it if I think you have at least some good
cause.
- If you ask me to reconsider a paper or exam essay, you accept the
possibility that my closer evaluation might bring your grade
down instead of up.
- The request must be within two weeks after the assignment was
returned.
- Reasons that in the past have not been acceptable for
changing a grade include:
- "I have to get into a good law school."
- "I was really tired that day."
- "Other teachers / classes / departments / universities
are easier."
Class policies
There are some other things I should mention up-front.
Academic integrity
You should be familiar with Kalamazoo's honor system and
academic
policies. If I have good evidence for any intentional academic
dishonesty, including plagiarism or cheating on an exam, the result
will be an automatic failure of the class for those involved, and a
report to the Dean's office. Remember that all websites or
papers you used in your writing -- directly or indirectly -- must be
cited. If you are unclear about what counts as plagiarism, please ask
me or an academic advisor.
Accommodations
I try to accommodate all learning styles and disabilities. If you
have a disability already documented with the college, I will be
informed of it in writing, but you may want to discuss it with me
anyway -- if so, please do so soon, in the way that makes you most
comfortable. If you have a disability that is not documented
with the college, please do get it documented as soon as
possible, so that I can extend accommodations -- see the policies on
disability.
Respect
As suggested in the honor system, it
is a basic groundrule for this class that all students treat each
other with respect for differences. That includes differences
in ethnic or economic background, differences in opinions, differences
in facility or difficulty with the material, differences in hesitancy
or eagerness to participate, etc.
Class procedures
- All cell phones and such should be turned off for class.
- You can call me "Steve".
- At least initially, all students are expected to raise hands
before speaking. Though a little formal, this helps ensure equal time
for those less eager to speak out or interrupt.
- I may call on you randomly in class. I know some aren't so
comfortable with that, but I think it's important for
everybody. Please don't panic. If you're confused by the
question or topic, just say so, and we'll work it out -- chances
are others will be grateful you said something.
- When you come to class, always have some specific
question written down about the material assigned for the day. I may
call on you to ask your question, and you should be prepared.
- Though I will encourage all of you to speak in class, there are
several other ways to participate in class. For example, you can
contribute to groups, ask questions for me or the class by email, or
visit office hours.
- Relax, enjoy, and don't hesitate to ask questions.
Course schedule and assignments
Here is a tentative schedule of the material we will be covering in
class. It is subject to change. In general your assignments are to
read the material before it's discussed in lecture. This first
reading is just to get the basic idea, and to know enough about it to
ask about the things you don't understand. (This reading is very hard
and you should not expect to understand it all the first time -- if
you do feel like you understood all of it, I can almost
guarantee that you actually understood next to none of it!) You
should then definitely read the material after it's discussed
in lecture as well -- you will find that you get much more out of it
the second time around. Also, notice that the readings for some days
are quite heavy, while the readings for other days are light to
nonexistent. I suggest you plan ahead for these differences.
Readings are in Introductory Readings in the Philosophy of
Science unless otherwise noted. Remember that though the class
topics may not always follow this schedule exactly, still the
readings will remain assigned for these days unless I explicitly say
otherwise.
Part 1: Science and pseudoscience
| Week |
Date |
Readings |
| week 1 |
3/28 |
(none) |
| 3/30 |
1 Popper (10p) |
| 4/1 |
2 Ziman (6p) |
| week 2 |
4/4 |
3 Feyerabend (12p) |
| 4/6 |
4 Thagard (10p) |
| 4/8 |
5 Kitcher (13p) |
| week 3 |
4/11 |
Mark Alspector-Kelly, WMU (tentative) |
| 3p paper assigned |
Part 2: Explanation and law
| Week |
Date |
Readings |
| week 3 |
4/13 |
11 Hempel (19p) |
| 4/15 |
12 Lambert and Britten (8p) |
| week 4 |
4/18 |
13 Cartwright (8p) |
| 4/20 |
14 Salmon (23p) |
| 3p paper due by 5pm |
| 4/22 |
15 van Fraassen (14p) |
| week 5 |
4/25 |
16 Kitcher (24p) |
Part 3: Theory and observation
| Week |
Date |
Readings |
| week 5 |
4/27 |
17 Carnap (17p) |
| 4/29 |
18 Putnam (6p) |
| week 6 |
5/2 |
19 Hanson (13p) |
| 5/4 |
22 Maxwell (11p) |
| 5/6 |
Midterm through 4/29 |
Part 4: Confirmation and theory choice
| Week |
Date |
Readings |
| week 7 |
5/9 |
24 Quine and Ullian (11p) |
| 5/11 |
25 Giere (20p) |
| 5/13 |
26 Kuhn (16p) |
| 6p paper assigned |
| week 8 |
5/16 |
27 Hempel (14p) |
| 5/18 |
28 Frank (11p) |
Part 5: Science and values
| Week |
Date |
Readings |
| week 8 |
5/20 |
29 Rudner (11p) |
| week 9 |
5/23 |
30 Hempel (16p) |
| 5/25 |
(none) |
| 6p paper due by 5pm |
| 5/27 |
33 Giere (15p) |
| week 10 |
5/30 |
no class--Memorial Day! |
| 6/1 |
Quentin Smith, WMU (tentative) |
| 6/3 |
(none) |
The final is as according to the registrar, on Wednesday
June 8th from 1-4pm.