Philosophy of science is concerned with the foundations, methods, and implications of the natural and social sciences. While it overlaps with core philosophical subdisciplines such as metaphysics, ontology, and epistemology, it is nevertheless distinguishable from them by virtue of its specific focus on scientific practice, scientific knowledge, and the conceptual structures that underline scientific inquiry.

In this course, we will be concerned with questions of knowledge in general, but also with questions that arise within the context of the special sciences. These include, for example, the criteria by which science may be distinguished from non-science or pseudo-science. This so-called demarcation problem was famously regarded by Karl Popper as the defining problem of the discipline. Closely related to this is the question of whether an account of scientific explanation can succeed on the grounds of the so-called deductive-nomological model, or whether alternative approaches are required. In particular, this raises the issue of whether causal and counterfactual notions can be accounted for truth-functionally or in a non-modal logic and whether they are indispensable for rendering the concepts of factual necessity and the notion of a scientific law intelligible.

Philosophy of science is also an enterprise that is shaped by its history, or more precisely by the problems that have emerged and that thinkers within the discipline have sought to solve. For this reason, we will begin with Hume and proceed toward logical empiricism in the twentieth century, before turning to more recent approaches. In this way, contemporary perspectives in the philosophy of science can be better understood, and the contributions that methodological reflection can offer to the special sciences should become clearer.

This course has two parts:

The main focus of Part A will lie in 20th centuries responses to classical problems in the philosophy of science. In Part B, we will apply the methodological and epistemological insights developed in Part A to the special sciences. The focus is here will not be on the specific theories in economics or sociology; rather the emphasis will be on questions of method, justification, and scientific reasoning.

Participants in this course are expected to develop a solid understanding of the nature and structure of scientific knowledge. The central aim is to clarify what distinguishes scientific claims from mere opinion, speculation, and naïve belief in an empirical “given”. By the end of the course, students should be able to analyze and critically assess the major approaches within the philosophy of science and to understand how a number of central problems have been formulated and addressed. They should be capable to meaningfully address questions like:

(i)           What counts as support for a scientific claim?

(ii)          What is meant by “induction”?

(iii)         Which formal conditions must be satisfied for the formulation of a hypothesis, a prediction, a confirmation of a prediction?

(iv)         How should the notion of “evidence” be understood?

(v)          What is meant by a “hypothetico-deductive account of scientific reasoning”?

(vi)         Does, and if so how does, the formulation of hypotheses depend on prior assumptions?

(vii)        What is a “demarcation criterion”, and how can pseudo-scientific claims be identified?

The course is structured so as to enable students to apply criteria of validity, to draw inferences from a systems of claims, and to assess how theoretical statements relate to singular sentences and how empirical “data” can be related to these sentences in such a way that they can be of inferential significance for this system of claims.  

It is essential for following this course to appreciate the difficulties and dilemmas involved in pursuing scientific questions.

This course is a PI course, which means that regular attendance and active participation are required. According to university regulations, attendance of all sessions is required. If you cannot participate in a session (conference, institute-meeting, etc.) please let me know me by email (and tell me why).

This course is explicitly text-based and methodologically oriented. In each session, we will focus on carefully selected passages from the primary literature, with the aim of reconstructing and critically assessing the argumentative structure of the respective positions.

Introductory comments at the beginning of each topic will serve to locate the texts within their broader historical context. Particular emphasis will be given on identifying the main question of a text, its underlying assumptions, and the precise line of argumentation. Class discussion will be organized around these argumentative structures.

To ensure understanding of the essential concepts and notions, a structured repetition in form of questions will be provided at the end of each session; a lecture text (scriptum) and slides to each session are available on the homepage in the relevant modules. Additional multiple-choice and single-choice questions are supposed to help to check one’s comprehension of key concepts. Weekly written assignments are intended to ensure that we are pursuing questions from a shared level of understanding the problems involved in pursuing questions about scientific reasoning.

Requirements and Assessment:

1. Weekly paper: (4) 4x 15 points max. 60 points
2. 1 Paper: 90 points max.
3. SC/MC exam: 60 points max.

In total: max 210 points
Excellent (1): 190 - 210 points
Good (2): 170 - 189 points
Satisfactory (3): 140 - 169 points
Sufficient (4): 115 - 139 points
Fail (5): <115 

In Part (B), the required paper is to be understood as a from the presentation independent paper. It is rather as a written and structured version of the presentation itself. The paper should lay out the central question, reconstruct the relevant argumentative steps of the text under consideration, and indicate the methodology an author applies to, critically assess this, and show the significance (or lack) of their conclusion. The function of the paper is to serve as a basis for discussion in class. 

If you want us to print out your paper you have to send it to us before 10.00 at the day of the presentation. 

Knowledge in philosophy is not required. What is required, however, is an interest in methodological questions and a willingness to engage with may be unfamiliar concept-expressions and seemingly demanding formalizations, and to follow detailed argumentative steps with care.

Please log in with your WU account to use all functionalities of read!t. For off-campus access to our licensed electronic resources, remember to activate your VPN connection connection. In case you encounter any technical problems or have questions regarding read!t, please feel free to contact the library at readinglists@wu.ac.at.

Just follow your interest in pursuing scientific questions!

ao.Univ.Prof.Dr. Gabriele M. Mras
Building D4, 3rd floor, room number D4.3.020
Tel.: 01-31336-4257
Email: gabriele.mras@wu.ac.at

Administration: Ursula Németh
Tel.: 01-31336-4775
Email: ursula.nemeth@wu.ac.at

Contact is possible by phone (yes, that option still exists) or by email.

Office hours are available in person or, if you prefer, online via Zoom or MS Teams, on request (both on Thursdays only). 

Please study the requirements and the assessment information carefully:

• the text in "the lecture texts" and the “slides xyz” really cover the whole course
• in “assignments” ( “assignment 1” ... ) you will find a number of open questions to be answered weekly.  Please answer every single question; do not write a whole text-block. Deadline as announced. Assignments that are sent to Ms. Németh or to me because they are not uploaded and so will not be graded. 
• SC/MC questions: just for practice (can be done multiple of times, you to "delete (your) results" to do so). 
• in “paper presentation” you will find the paper topics for your group presentations the last session. Decide which paper topic you choose 2 weeks after the 1^st session the latest. 
• MC/SC-test: 60 questions (60 minutes); this term right after the Easter holidays (I thought this might be more convenient for you)
• contribution in discussion sessions + points by answering questions of your colleagues receive extra points 

Where: The exam will be held on the Canvas course page under “Exam.”

Format: The exam consists of 60 multiple-choice (MC) and single-choice (SC) questions. 60 minutes time.

When: 9.4.2026. The exam starts officially at 4:30 p.m. (because you are given 30 minutes time for preparation). The actual exam starts at 5:00. You will have exactly 60 minutes to complete it, until 6:00 p.m.

Do not skip any questions to look ahead; there is no possibility to go back or revise answers once they are submitted.

You know it well, but I have to explicitly say it: the exam is not open book. So, no course materials, notes, or additional devices may be used. No communication with colleagues via MS Teams, email, or any other platform is allowed.

Once you finish, you can but you do not need to submit manually. The exam folder will close automatically at the end of the allotted time.

Technical issues during the exam: If you encounter any internet or technical problems, please send an email with the subject line “error” and/or better call me: 31336-4257.

Treat the exam as a light, timed check of knowledge.