Corso di laurea magistrale in Filosofia

Elementary knowledge of logic and philosophy of science, interest in scientific reasoning. The course does not presuppose knowledge of the theory of probability, or other mathematics. Students without relevant background are welcome, but you may have to do extra work for filling the gaps. The course is also of interest for continentally oriented philosophers.

Students will be able to answer the question what distinguishes science from other human endeavors, and to which degree (and in which respects) it is rational and can be trusted. They can also assess the scope and limits of scientific knowledge, they understand why science is often successful, and they appreciate the significance of scientific reasoning for other kinds of human endeavor.

On the level of acquired skills, following the course will improve their analytical reasoning skills, train them in rigorous argumentation and familiarize them with scientific tools for probabilistic and causal reasoning (e.g., programs such as Netica and Samiam).

Mixture of lectures and seminar. Active contribution from the participants is a prerequisite for passing the course.

Essay (ca. 3,000 words) and written exam. These two elements count equally toward the final grade (45% each). The remaining 10% of the grade is determined on the basis of contributions in class.

The course introduces the students to central debates in philosophy of science, such as the rationality and progress of science, causation, induction, scientific objectivity, values in science, and so on, with a focus on contemporary debates. These topics are mainly approached from an epistemological perspective. Questions we discuss are:
– What distinguishes genuine, knowledge-generating science from pseudo-science such as astrology?
– Can the problem of induction (i.e., challenging the rationality of inferring from past to future experience) be solved?
– What are the standard models of causation developed in philosophy and the sciences?
– Can science be free of political, religious and social values? (Think of research on gender or race differences, for instance.) Would this value-freedom be desirable in the first place?
– Can science be trusted in spite of the large uncertainties it comes with? How does it cope with the replication crisis?
– Why is the epistemology of science so important for a philosophical study of human knowledge?

The course is structured as follows:

• Week 1 and 2: Scientific Rationality. Recapitulation of classical contributions (Popper, Kuhn) and its application to "creation science". Exposition of the historical lines going back to logical empiricism (Carnap, Reichenbach).
• Week 3 and 4: Causation and Bayes Nets. Discussion of David Lewis' counterfactual model of causation, contrast with probabilistic causality and the interventionist account. Introduction to tools for causal modeling with Bayes nets. Use of the Netica program for causal reasoning.
• Week 5+6: The Reliability of Scientific Inference. Introduction to statistical inference in science. The replication crisis and the influence of values and questionable research practices on the accuracy of scientific results. The Incentive structure of science and a socio-epistemic perspective on scientific inference.

The above texts are good references for students who haven't had any philosophy of science classes so far.

Some weeks before the course, registered students will find on campusnet a course syllabus, which contains a more detailed schedule and a list of the texts we will read in class.