Here is a link to the electronic course reserve list: Reserve List

 

●    For Friday, Jan. 20: Read pp. 1-33 in Rosenberg. Note each point along the way that you don’t understand (or don’t agree with). Come to class prepared to tell the class about some of these.

●    For Monday, Jan. 23: Read the article by Hempel that is on electronic reserve.

●    For Wednesday, Jan. 25: Finish reading Ch. 2. Try to understand just what Rosenberg says about what laws of nature are and what the main objections to Hempel’s account of explanations are.

●    For Friday, Jan. 27: On p. 40 Rosenberg says, “It may seem a straightforward matter to extend the D-N model to statistical explanations.” He seems to think that in fact it is not so straightforward. Try to understand what his reasons for this are.

●    For Mon. Jan. 30: Read pp. 41-45, 49-55.

●    For Wed. Feb. 1: Read the article by Kitcher on reserve and pp. 55-56 in Rosenberg.

●    For Fri. Feb. 3: Finish reading Chapter 3.

●    First Writing Assignment: due Fri. Feb. 3. This assignment is based on study question 3 on p. 67 of Rosenberg’s book. The question as presented in the book asks you to defend one or the other of two views about what the theory of natural selection shows about the existence of “purpose in nature.” However, instead of having to defend one of these views, your assignment is to write one or at most two pages in which you explain how people who defend the second alternative are thinking about things. Note: as explained in class, the idea here is for you to find the part of the chapter in which Rosenberg discusses this point and to explain the idea there in as clear and simple a way as you can. Using a simple example in your discussion may be helpful. Do not go to outside sources.

●    Feb. 6, 2006: Re-revised schedule for next few classes:

      ○     On Fri. Feb. 3 we will conclude our discussion of causal accounts of explanation and also discuss pragmatic accounts. See pp. 41-44 of the text. Try to understand what the pragmatic account says, and what its strengths and weaknesses are supposed to be. Your first written assignment is due.

      ○     On Mon. Feb. 6 we will discuss explanation as unification. The readings for this are an article by Philip Kitcher, available here. (It is not on reserve in the library. Sorry about the mixup on this.) Also read pp. 55-6 of the text. We will continue with this on 2/8.

      ○     On Wed. Feb. 8 we will conclude the discussion of accounts of explanations. You should have completed reading Ch. 3 of the text. The first HW assignment will be returned and the second HW assignment will be made.

●    For Fri. Feb. 10: Read 4.1-4.2 of the Rosenberg book.

●    Second Homework Assignment: due Monday Feb. 13. Read the article by Hanson that is on reserve: Hanson, “Observation” On p. 340, Hanson asks this question: “Do Kepler and Tycho see the same thing in the east at dawn?” What is Hanson’s answer to this question? A clearly worded and precisely written response of 1 page (or at most 2 pages) should suffice.

●    For Wed. Feb. 15: Read section 4.3 of the text.

●    The first test will be Wed. Feb. 22. Here’s the Study Guide.

●    For Fri. Mar. 3: Read the Section 5.1 (pp. 112-116) of Rosenberg and the selection from Bertrand Russell from the reserve reading list (Reserve List). Write a one page response to the questions in Assignment 3.

●    For Mon. Mar. 6: Read Section 5.2 of Rosenberg.

●    For Fri. Mar. 10: Read Section 5.3 of Rosenberg.

●    For Mon. Mar. 20: Read the article from the reserve list by Popper. Also, review 5.3 of Rosenberg, looking especially at what he says about “falsification.”

●    For Wed. Mar. 22: Finish reading Ch. 5. There will be a homework assignment about the last sections given out on 3/22 and due on 3/24.

●    Assignment 4 is due on Fri. Mar. 24.

●    For Fri. Mar. 31: Read the following article by Paul Thagard “Why Astrology is a Pseudoscience” and then answer the questions in Assignment 5.            

●    Here is Study Guide for Test 2.

●    For Fri. Apr. 7: Read Ch. 6 and 7 of Rosenberg. We will mainly focus on his comments on the views of Thomas Kuhn. These are discussed in sections 6.1, 7.1, and 7.3. It would be good to read the other parts of these chapters, but these sections are the most important for us. There is a paper by Kuhn on the reserve reading list. Consider this optional reading. If you do read it, keep the following in mind: this is a later essay by Kuhn, and it defends views other than the ones Rosenberg is discussing. Or maybe it is supposed to clarify what he meant in his early work. Rosenberg includes a few comments in his discussion that make clear that Kuhn’s views changed (or were misinterpreted).

●    For Mon. Apr. 10: Read Stephen Jay Gould’s Nonoverlapping Magisteria. Be prepared to discuss his main claims and his arguments in their defense. Be sure to print out a copy of the article and bring it class.                  

●    For Wed. Apr. 12: Assignment 6: in light of the introductory discussion/summary of Gould’s views from class on 4/10, write one or two paragraph (less than a page) commentary in which you raise a question about what Gould has written. It can be an objection or a request for clarification or an observation about something that needs further development and support. Be prepared to discuss these points in class. The homework will be collected.

●    For Fri. Apr. 14: Read Richard Dawkins’ When Religion Steps on Science’s Turf. Be prepared to discuss whether he has a good objection to Gould’s view, as developed in class on 4/12. Also, think about your own evaluation of Gould’s argument.

●    For Mon. Apr. 17: Read the chapters from Dennett’s Breaking the Spell available on the reserve reading list. We will discuss this after concluding discussion of Gould and Dawkins.

●    Read the following two reviews of Dennett’s book: NY Times Review (Leon Wieseltier) and The New Yorker (Allen Orr). They should give you a better idea what Dennett argues for in the rest of the book. What’s the first reviewer’s main gripe?

●    For Mon. Apr. 24: Re-read the Dennett chapters and the reviews mentioned above. Think about these 2 questions: a) What is Dennett’s answer to the question raised at the end of today’s class. (See the notes if you need to be reminded of the question.) b) What, exactly, are Wieseltier’s objections to Dennett in the first of the two reviews listed above? Are any of these objections any good? [There is no written assignment due on Monday.]

●    You have the option of writing a final paper instead of taking the final test on May 1. You can get information about it here: Optional Final Paper Assignment.

●    Here is a Study Guide for Test 3.

 

Last updated: April 28, 2006 by Richard Feldman