PHL321 Philosophy of Science
Professor: Craig DeLancey
Remember, there will be no incompletes for this class.
Hand in all work!
Wednesday 13 December
Note. On this day, unfortunately, I cannot have my
office hours. I will have office hours all day December
11 to make up for this.
Take home final "paper" due before 4:00 pm.
Answer three of the following questions. Each answer
should be about 1.5 to 2 typewritten pages long. Avoid
filler. See my "analytic philosophy paper format" for
guidelines on writing.
- Explain the DN model of science. What are some
limitations of the model?
- What is the incommensurability of theories thesis?
Why would one believe the thesis? That is, what arguments
are there for the thesis? What arguments might we make
against the thesis?
- Explain the "sociology of science" critique of
scientific results. Evaluate Woolgar and Latour's
(implicit) critique of scientific results, perhaps by
reading one of the cited papers or works. How should a
realist respond to it?
- Explain Harding or Longino's "feminist" critique of
scientific results. Evaluate Harding or Longino's critique
of scientific results, perhaps by reading one of the cited
papers or works. How should a realist respond to the
- Does science have a track record of success? What
should count as success? Is success proof that the method
is good? Do such considerations answer Feyerabend's
"epistemological anarchism"? What is Feyerabend's
- What arguments might we best offer in favor of anti-realism?
What is the no-miracles argument (aka the convergence
argument) against anti-realism? What is anti-realism?
What is realism? Which arguments do you find more compelling?
Tentative Assignments (subject to revision)