Syllabus

Title
4107 Philosophy of Science
Instructors
ao.Univ.Prof. Dr. Gabriele Mras
Contact details
gabriele.mras@wu.ac.at
Type
PI
Weekly hours
2
Language of instruction
Englisch
Registration
02/05/20 to 02/26/20
Registration via LPIS
Notes to the course
Subject(s) Doctoral/PhD Programs
Philosophy of Science
Methodology and Theory
Dates
Day Date Time Room
Wednesday 04/01/20 03:00 PM - 06:00 PM TC.4.04
Wednesday 04/15/20 03:00 PM - 06:30 PM TC.4.04
Wednesday 04/22/20 03:00 PM - 06:30 PM TC.4.04
Wednesday 04/29/20 03:00 PM - 06:30 PM TC.4.04
Wednesday 05/06/20 03:00 PM - 06:30 PM Online-Einheit
Wednesday 05/13/20 03:00 PM - 06:30 PM Online-Einheit
Wednesday 05/27/20 03:00 PM - 05:00 PM Online-Einheit

On this page:

to top
Contents

We will look at different conceptions of “empirical science” throughout the history of specific sciences, we will see a number of misconceptions concerning “induction” and read and discuss David Hume’s paradigmatic analysis of the structure of “induction”; i.e. the infamous problem concerning the possibility of justifying empirical claims as scientific; the concept of "causality" and that of a “necessary” and “sufficient” condition will be explicated, analysed and discussed; the consequences of not being able to justify “factual necessity” will be pursued and the moral drawn from this. 

We will begin Aristotle understanding of valid inference in his “Analytica Priora”; his idea of “demonstrative sciences” and his conception of “epagoge” in his “Analytica Posteriora”. Next we will jump into the 18th century and to David Hume's analysis of induction and treatment of causality in his Enquiry; i.e. Sceptical doubts concerning the operations of the human understanding". Then we will move on to the 19th century and John Stuart Mill’s conception of causality (i.e. his distinction between "necessary and sufficient conditions") in his "Logic". As more modern approaches in the philosophy of science we will discuss two kinds of confirmation theory that have been defended in the 20th century. The final part of this course will be devoted to looking back at the idea of something “empirical” and the relationship of the concepts causality, explanation, prediction.

to top
Learning outcomes

Participants of this course are supposed to get familiar with the nature of scientific knowledge; i.e. what is to be acquired is knowledge about what distinguishes scientific claims from (mere) opinions, metaphysical statements or assertions of faith. At the end of this course one ought to be able to analyse and evaluate the most influential approaches of the philosophy of science and the ways in which the following questions have been pursued:

  1. What is the potential support of a scientific claim?
  2. What are the ways in which scientific claims could be used in order to formulate predictions?
  3. In which way does the formulation of a hypothesis depend on (1) and (2)?

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

to top
Attendance requirements

DISTANCE  LEARNING 

to top
Teaching/learning method(s)

ATTENTION: THIS COURSE WILL BE IN ‚DISTANCE LEARNING‘ MODE 
FOR ALL OF THE SESSIONS = WE WILL NOT MEET 
 

COURSE DESIGN:

Please look into LearnWU:

20-25  „lecture slides“ per session, all the texts are online

Assessment:

„questions to be considered“ — please answer them (these are the ‚weekly assignments‘ ) 

+ paper

+ MPC test

originally:

(i) lecture, (ii) text analysis, (iii) discussion;

At the beginning of each session there will always be a short introduction from my side. But this course is primarily focused on analyzing arguments, i.e. actually  reading  the philosophical texts listed. It is therefore expected throughout the course that everybody has read the primary literature prior to our discussions in class.  Everybody is also expected to participate actively in class. At the end of every session there will be “study questions” which mirror the structure of the sessions and should serve as a repetition of the main points of each session.

to top
Assessment

Requirements and Assessment:

  1. You will find a set of questions in LearnWU; the questions are based on the argument structure of the class: 35%
  2. presentation: 35%
  3. Final exam: 30%
to top
Prerequisites for participation and waiting lists

Some knowledge in philosophy would be helpful, but is not required.

to top
Availability of lecturer(s)

OFFICE HOURS ARE CANCELLED

ao.Univ.Prof.Dr. Gabriele M. Mras
Office hours: Thursday 12:00 - 13:00,
Building D4, 3rd floor, room number D4.3.020
Tel.: 01-31336-4257
Email: gabriele.mras@wu.ac.at

Administration: Bettina Gerdenich
Tel.: 01-31336-4166
Email: bettina.gerdenich@wu.ac.at

to top
Unit details
Unit Date Contents
1 01.04.2020

Intro to class, administrative details, course overview;

The questions we pursue are:

"What is science?", "What is it the aim of a philosophy of science?", "What corresponds to scientific statements?", "How could something to be show to correspond to these statements?"

A) DEDUCTION & THE QUESTION: WHAT CORERSPONDS TO AN ANALYTIC STATEMENT / TO A SYNTHETIC STATEMENT?

  1. "What corresponds to an analytic statement?" "What is meant by "deduction"?
  2. "What are examples of fallacies in causal reasoning?" 

Readings:
2 15.04.2020

B) THE CIRCLE OF INDUCTION AND THE CONCEPT OF CAUSALITY

  1. David Hume's analysis of inductive reasoning.
  2. Consequences

Readings:
3 22.04.2020

C) JOHN STUART MILL: NECESSARY AND SUFFICIENT CONDITIONS

  1. Causal dependencies and the idea of necessity.
  2. John Stuart Mill’s distinction between necessary and sufficient conditions.
  3. Papers/online-discussion:a. Mill on causation, b. Mill’s method of experimental enquiry, c. Hausman on Mill, d. Hausman on Causation (see articles/ chapters below)

Readings:
4 29.04.2020

D) LOGICAL EMPIRICISM AND FACTUAL NECESSITY

1. The idea of confirmation vs. the aim of proving a theory to be true.

  • The "Vienna Circle" and the principle of verifiability.
  • What is verifiability? What are singular consequences of hypothetical statements? What is meant by "reduction of general sentence to observational sentences"?
  • What are the basic properties of observation sentences or "protocol sentences"?

2. The distinction between meaningful and meaningless sentences.

  • Rudolf Carnap's criticism of metaphysics.
  • The "protocol sentence-debate" in the mid-30ies of the 20th century.

 

Readings:

  • Carnap, R.: What is Logical Analysis of Science? in: Hanfling O. (Ed.): Essential Readings in Logical Positivism; Oxford 1981, p. 112-129.
  • Carnap, R.: The Unity of Science; Bristol 1995, p. 42-52.
  • Stroud, B.: Causation; in: Engagement and Metaphysical Dissatisfaction. Modality and Value; Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press 2011, p. 20-58.
5 06.05.2020

E) THE PRINCIPLE OF FALSIFIABILITY

1. Karl Popper's principle of falsifiability.

  • Falsifiability in contrast to verifiability.
  • What is the problem of the "demarcation principle" as suggested by the "Vienna Circle"?
  • What is modus tollens?

2. The Problem of The Empirical Basis

  • What are "basic sentences"?
  • The distinction between justified, true, verified, falsified, verifiable, falsifiable, corroborated scientific statements.
  • The theory / observation dichotomy.
  • is Popper's method of “falsifiability” really so much better than “verifiability”?

Readings:
6 13.05.2020

F) Papers/online-discussion: application of confirmation theories — choose your own material but contact me! 

Readings:
7 27.05.2020

Final Exam
Last edited: 2020-05-18



Back