Scientific Progress - AFSV00428

• Anglický název: Scientific Progress
• Zajišťuje: Ústav filosofie a religionistiky (21-UFAR)
• Fakulta: Filozofická fakulta
• Platnost: od 2025
• Semestr: zimní
• Body: 0
• E-Kredity: 5
• Způsob provedení zkoušky: zimní s.:
• Rozsah, examinace: zimní s.:0/2, Zk [HT]
• Počet míst: neurčen / neurčen (neurčen)
• Minimální obsazenost: neomezen
• 4EU+: ne
• Virtuální mobilita / počet míst pro virtuální mobilitu: ne
• Stav předmětu: nevyučován
• Jazyk výuky: angličtina
• Způsob výuky: prezenční
• Poznámka: předmět je možno zapsat mimo plán; povolen pro zápis po webu
• Garant: MA Francisco Javier Hernandez Gutierrez
• Třída: Exchange - 05.7 Educ. Science, Comparative Educ.; Exchange - 08.1 Philosophy; Exchange - 08.9 Others-Humanities

Anotace

Science often distinguishes itself from other human practices, by the general consensus that it is a progressive activity. This means that if there is progress in some area of human life, this should, at the very least, include science. It is no surprise then that scientific progress is a widely acknowledged phenomenon in the history of science. In contrast with other disciplines (such as art, philosophy, religion, etc.), there seem to be clear criteria for identifying improvements in scientific practices that lead to progressive episodes in the history of science. However, this picture of science as being, all things considered, progressive has not been immune to criticism, especially given the negative impact that some scientific and technological developments have had on society at large (e.g. weaponization of science and technology, overexploitation of natural resources leading to environmental catastrophes and anthropogenic climate change, etc.); as well as the list of potential risks posed by new scientific and technological developments (e.g. exponential growth of artificial intelligence, improvements in methods of surveillance and control, etc.). In this course we will critically assess the normative basis for qualifying certain episodes in the history of science as progressive, in light of this criticism. We will try to decipher what, if anything, makes science progressive.

Poslední úprava: Hernandez Gutierrez Francisco Javier, MA (10.09.2024)

Podmínky zakončení předmětu

Aim

Students will become familiar with the history, debates and problems surrounding the notion of ‘scientific progress’. They will have the opportunity to reflect on their intuitions about this notion and defend their positions by engaging in stimulating discussions about the normative significance of the concept of 'progress'. Meetings will consist of an introductory lecture, and one or two short presentations, followed by class discussion led by the instructor and presenter(s). Ideally there will be one presentation per assigned reading.

 

Participation

Students are expected to have read the day’s Mandatory Readings (between 15-30 pages per week) and be ready to discuss them, especially if they are presenting that day. 

 

Recommended Readings are just recommended in case the student wants to dig deeper into the topic. Although these will also be discussed during lecture, students are not expected to have read them, but are still encouraged to do so. 

 

Participation in class is not graded, but highly encouraged. Substantive, rather than extensive, participation is preferred. Students should aim to make their participation as fruitful (for all participants) as possible.

Materials

All mandatory (and recommended) readings will be made available (in English) via the course’s website. The instructor will also share articles of interest throughout the duration of the course. Students are encouraged to do the same.

 

Evaluation

Attendance (10%)

Presentation (30%)

Term Paper (60%)

 

• Presentations should last between 10-15 minutes, and should focus on one point discussed in the reading. Students should provide a handout or powerpoint slides (sent at least one day in advance to the instructor).

• There are three options for the Term Paper:

• a) Response to one of the authors discussed in class

• b) Comparative piece between two authors discussed in class

• c) Original piece putting forward and defending a clearly identified thesis that is relevant to the content of the course

• It is recommended that students consult their topic with the instructor in advance.

• The length of the Term Paper should be between 1,500-4,000 words, and should have a clearly identified thesis and be written concisely. Following a particular writing style, citation style, etc., is not required, but students should be clear about the purpose of their paper, as well as their argumentative strategy, and they should avoid any kind of plagiarism at all costs.

Poslední úprava: Hernandez Gutierrez Francisco Javier, MA (10.09.2024)

Sylabus

Week 1 (30.09) - (Western) Scientific Revolution

Week 2 (07.10) - (European) Enlightenment

Week 3 (14.10) - Critique of Progress

Week 4 (21.10) - Positivism and Falsificationism

Czech National Holiday (No Class)

Week 5 (04.11) - Scientific Dynamics and Dynamic Science

Week 6 (11.11) - Research Programmes

Humanities’ Week (No Class)

Week 7 (25.11) - Semantic Approach

Week 8 (02.12) - Epistemic Approach

Week 9 (09.12) - Problem-Solving Approach and Pragmatic Progress

Week 10 (16.12) - Noetic Approach

Christmas Break (No Class)

Week 11 (06.01) - Values in Science & Progress as a Human Right

 

Term Paper Due: 16.02

 

Week 1: (Western) Scientific Revolution

 

Mandatory Reading

Bacon, F. (1962). The Advancement of Learning (G. W. Kitchin, Ed.). Dent. [Originally published in 1605].

Simon, J. (2024). ‘Scientific and Social Progress?’. Metascience, 33(2), 157-159.

 

Recommended Reading

Lévi-Strauss, C. (2021). Wild Thought: A New Translation of “La Pensée sauvage” (J. Mehlman & J. Leavitt, Trans.). University of Chicago Press.

Nickles, T. (1999). Scientific Discovery: Case Studies. D. Reidel.

Olusoga, D. (2018). Civilizations: First Contact/The Cult of Progress. Profile Books.

 

Week 2: (European) Enlightenment

 

Mandatory Reading

Condorcet, M. (1796). Outlines of an Historical View of the Progress of the Human Mind. M. Carey, H. & P. Rice and Co.

Turgot, A. (1973). A Philosophical Review of the Successive Advances of the Human Mind. In R. L. Meek (Ed.). Turgot on Progress, Sociology and Economics. Cambridge University Press. [Originally published in 1750].

 

Recommended Reading

Horkheimer, M. & Adorno, T. (2002). Dialectic of Enlightenment (G. Schmid Noerr, Ed., E. Jephcott, Trans.). Stanford University Press. [Originally published in 1947].

Kant, I. (1784). Beantwortung der Frage: Was ist Aufklärung?. Berlinische Monatsschrift.

 

Week 3: Critique of Progress

 

Mandatory Reading

Jaeggi, R. (2023). Progress and Regression. Humboldt University Berlin, 1-25. [Manuscript].

 

Recommended Reading

Adorno, T. (1955). An Essay on Cultural Criticism and Society. In Prism (S. Weber & S Weber). MIT Press.

Allen, A. (2016). The End of Progress: Decolonizing the Normative Foundations of Critical Theory. Columbia University Press.

Arendt, H. (2006). The Conquest of Space and the Stature of Man. In Between Past and Future (pp. 260-274). Penguin.

Chakravarty, D. (2008). Provincializing Europe: Postcolonial Thought and Historical Difference. Princeton University Press.

Diamond, J. (2003). Why Societies Collapse? [Talk at Princeton University]. Princeton University Press.

Labatut, B. (2021). When We Cease to Understand the World. Pushkin Press.

Wright, R. (2004). A Short History of Progress. Da Capo Press.

 

Week 4: Positivism and Falsificationism

 

Mandatory Reading

Comte, A. (1896). The Positive Philosophy of Auguste Comte: 3 Volumes (H. Martineau, Trans.). George Bell & Sons. [Originally published between 1830-1842].

Popper, K. (1963). Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. Hutchinson.

 

Recommended Reading

Bourdeau, M., Pickering, M., & Schmaus, W. (2018). Love, Order & Progress, The Science, Philosophy and Politics of Auguste Comte. University of Pittsburgh Press.

Tambolo, L. (2015). A tale of three theories: Feyerabend and Popper on progress and the aim of science. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 51(1), 33-41.

Watkins, John W. N. (1997). Popperian Ideas on Progress and Rationality in Science, The Critical Rationalist, 2(2).

 

Week 5: Scientific Dynamics and Dynamic Science

 

Mandatory Reading

Kuhn, T. (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (2nd Ed.) University of Chicago Press.

 

Recommended Reading

Ben-David, J. (1971). Scientist Role in Society: a Comparative Study. Prentice Hall. 

Rantala, V. (2002). Explanatory Translation: Beyond the Kuhnian Model of Conceptual Change. Kluwer.

Rescher, N. (1978). Scientific Progress: A Philosophical Essay on the Economics of Research in Natural Science. University of Pittsburgh Press.

Stegmüller, W. (1976). The Structure and Dynamics of Theories. Springer-Verlag.

 

Week 6: Research Programmes and Pragmatic Progress

 

Mandatory Reading

Lakatos, I. (1989). The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes. Cambridge University Press.

 

Recommended Reading

Ankeny, R. & Leonelli, S. (2016). Repertoires: A Post-Kuhnian Perspective on Scientific Change and Collaborative Research. Studies in the History and the Philosophy of Science (Part A), 60, 18-28.

Mizrahi, M. (2013). What is Scientific Progress? Lessons from Scientific Practice. Journal of General Philosophy of Science, 44, 375-390.

 

Week 7: Semantic Approach

 

Mandatory Reading

Niiniluoto, I. (2017). Optimistic Realism about Scientific Progress. Synthese, 194(1), 3291-3309.

 

Recommended Reading

Barrett, J. A. (2008). Approximate Truth and Descriptive Nesting. Erkenntnis, 68, 213-224.

Cevolani, G. & Tambolo, L. (2013). Progress as Approximation to the Truth: A Defense of Verisimilitudinarian Approach. Erkenntnis, 78(4), 921-935.

 

Week 8: Epistemic Approach

 

Mandatory Reading

Bird, A. (2022). Knowing Science. Oxford University Press.

 

Recommended Reading

Chang, H. (2004). Inventing Temperature: Measurement and Scientific Progress. Oxford University Press.

Longino, H. (2002). The Fate of Knowledge. Princeton University Press.

 

Week 9: Problem-Solving Approach and Pragmatic Progress

 

Mandatory Reading

Laudan, L. (1977). Progress and its Problems: Toward a Theory of Scientific Growth. Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Kitcher, P. (1995). The Advancement of Science: Science without Legend, Objectivity without Illusions. Oxford University Press.

 

Recommended Reading

Almeder, R. (1983). Scientific Progress and Peircean Utopian Realism. Erkenntnis, 20(1), 253-280.

Hempel, C. G. (1965). Aspects of Scientific Explanation. The Free Press.

Martin, B. & Irvine, J. (1983). Assessing Basic Research: Some Partial Indicators of Scientific Progress in Radio Astronomy. Research Policy, 12, 61-90.

 

Week 10: Noetic Approach

 

Mandatory Reading

Dellsén, F. (2022). Understanding Scientific Progress: The Noetic Account. Synthese, 199(1), 11249-11278.

 

Recommended Reading

Lawler, I. (2022). Scientific Progress and Idealization. In Y. Shan (Ed.), New Philosophical Perspectives on Scientific Progress (332-354) Routledge.

Nowakowa, I. & Nowak, L. (2000). The Richness of Idealization. Rodopi.

Winsberg, E. (2012). Values and Uncertainties in the Predictions of Global Climate Models. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, 22(2), 111-137.

 

Week 11: Values in Science & Progress as a Human Right

 

Mandatory Reading

Douglas, H. (2014). Pure Science and the Problem of Progress. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science (Part A), 46(1), 55-63.

Massimi, M. (2022). A human-right approach to scientific progress. The deontic framework. In Y. Shan (Ed.), New Philosophical Perspectives on Scientific Progress. Routledge.

 

Recommended Reading

Almassi, B. (2019). Beyond Science Wars Redux: Feminist Philosophy of Science as Trustworthy Science Criticism. Hypatia, 34(4), 585-868.

Arendt, H. (2006). Truth and Politics. In Between Past and Future (pp. 223-259). Penguin.

Barad, K. (1996). Meeting the Universe Halfway: Realism and Social Constructivism without Contradiction. In L. H. Nelson & J. Nelson (Eds) Feminism, Science, and the Philosophy of Science, vol. 256 (pp. 161-194). Springer Dordrecht.

Dasgupta, D. (2009). Progress in Science and Science at the Non-Western Peripheries. Spontaneous Generations, 3(1), 142-157.

de Gortari, E. (2016). Perspectivas de la Investigación Científica. In La ciencia en la historia de México (2nd Ed.) (pp. 528-555). Fondo de Cultura Económica.

Duhem, P. (1954). The Aim and Structure of Physical Theory (P. Wiener, Trans.). Princeton University Press.

Hernández, F. (2024). An oasis of "civilization" in a desert of "barbarism": scientific progress as a tool of oppression [Paper presentation]. Liberated Conference, Prague, Czech Republic.

Husserl, E. (1970). The Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology: An Introduction to Phenomenological Philosophy. Northwestern University Press.

Lukács, G. (1972). History and Class Consciousness: Studies in Marxist Dialectics. MIT Press.

Massimi, M. (2022). Perspectival Realism. Oxford University Press.

Rowbottom, D. (2023). Scientific Progress. Cambridge University Press.

Schäfer, W. (1983). Finalization in Science: The Social Orientation of Scientific Progress. Reidel.

Schroeder, S. A. (2022). Thinking about Values in Science: Ethical versus Political Approaches, Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 52(3), 246–255.

Viveiros de Castro, E. (1998). Cosmological Perspectivism in Amazonia and Elsewhere. Four lectures given in the Department of Social Anthropology. Hau Masterclass Series.

 

Poslední úprava: Hernandez Gutierrez Francisco Javier, MA (08.11.2024)