Module PHL2026 for 2018/9
- Overview
- Aims and Learning Outcomes
- Module Content
- Indicative Reading List
- Assessment
Undergraduate Module Descriptor
PHL2026: Philosophy of Science
This module descriptor refers to the 2018/9 academic year.
Module Aims
The course seeks to open up and address key questions concerning scientific knowledge, practice and the world. You will engage with a range of canonical texts in the philosophy of science and become familiar with central debates in the field. You will also think critically about the nature of science and its place in the modern world.
| On successfully completing the programme you will be able to: | |
|---|---|
| Module-Specific Skills | 1. acquire a variety of conceptual tools for analysing the nature of science as a body of knowledge and a field of practice 2. adopt a stance of critical distance from one of the most powerful and authoritative cultural formations in the contemporary world, and to achieve a sophisticated appreciation of current issues and problems surrounding science in our society; |
| Discipline-Specific Skills | 3. engage with key philosophical debates on topics including the nature of knowledge, representation, classification, epistemology, practice and ontology; 4. acquire interdisciplinary experience in integrating such thinking with sociological perspectives concerning the social nature of scientific practice and the institutional position of science in its broader social context |
| Personal and Key Skills | 5. learn to think, write and argue logically through class discussions and written assignments 6. challenge and think in new ways about science as an authoritative body of knowledge and a key social institution 7. reconsider your personal understanding of science and its place in their own culture; |
How this Module is Assessed
In the tables below, you will see reference to 'ILO's. An ILO is an Intended Learning Outcome - see Aims and Learning Outcomes for details of the ILOs for this module.
Formative Assessment
A formative assessment is designed to give you feedback on your understanding of the module content but it will not count towards your mark for the module.
| Form of assessment | Size of the assessment (eg length / duration) | ILOs assessed | Feedback method |
|---|---|---|---|
| Seminar presentation | 5 minutes | 1-7 | Verbal feedback |
Summative Assessment
A summative assessment counts towards your mark for the module. The table below tells you what percentage of your mark will come from which type of assessment.
| Coursework | Written exams | Practical exams |
|---|---|---|
| 100 | 0 | 0 |
...and this table provides further details on the summative assessments for this module.
| Form of assessment | % of credit | Size of the assessment (eg length / duration) | ILOs assessed | Feedback method |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Essay 1 | 50 | 2000 words | 1-7 | Written feedback |
| Essay 2 | 50 | 2000 words | 1-7 | Written feedback |
| 0 | ||||
| 0 | ||||
| 0 | ||||
| 0 |
Re-assessment
Re-assessment takes place when the summative assessment has not been completed by the original deadline, and the student has been allowed to refer or defer it to a later date (this only happens following certain criteria and is always subject to exam board approval). For obvious reasons, re-assessments cannot be the same as the original assessment and so these alternatives are set. In cases where the form of assessment is the same, the content will nevertheless be different.
| Original form of assessment | Form of re-assessment | ILOs re-assessed | Timescale for re-assessment |
|---|---|---|---|
| Essay 1 | Essay 1 | 1-7 | August/September assessment period |
| Essay 2 | Essay 2 | 1-7 | August/September assessment period |
Indicative Reading List
This reading list is indicative - i.e. it provides an idea of texts that may be useful to you on this module, but it is not considered to be a confirmed or compulsory reading list for this module.
Selections from:
Barnes, B., Bloor, D., & Henry, J. (1996) Scientific Knowledge: A Sociological Analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Cartwright, N. (1983) How the Laws of Physics Lie. Oxford: Clarendon.
Curd, M., Cover, J.A. and Pincock (Eds.) (2012) Philosophy of Science: The Central Issues. New York: Norton.
Godfrey-Smith, P. (2003) Theory and Reality: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Goodman, N. (1954) Fact, Fiction, and Forecast. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Kuhn, T. (1970) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Latour, B. (1987) Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Lipton, P. (1991) Inference to the Best Explanation. New York: Routledge.
Okasha, S. (2002) Philosophy of Science: A Very Short Introduction, Oxford: OUP.
Popper, K. (1959) The Logic of Scientific Discovery. London: Routledge.
Psillos, S. (1999) Scientific Realism: How Science Tracks Truth. London: Routledge.
Van Frassen, B. (1980) The Scientific Image. Oxford: Clarendon.
