180073 SE Contemporary Discussions on Scientific Pluralism (2017W)
Prüfungsimmanente Lehrveranstaltung
Labels
An/Abmeldung
Hinweis: Ihr Anmeldezeitpunkt innerhalb der Frist hat keine Auswirkungen auf die Platzvergabe (kein "first come, first served").
- Anmeldung von Fr 08.09.2017 12:00 bis Fr 22.09.2017 12:00
- Anmeldung von Mo 25.09.2017 12:10 bis Fr 29.09.2017 12:00
- Abmeldung bis Di 31.10.2017 12:00
Details
max. 30 Teilnehmer*innen
Sprache: Englisch
Lehrende
Termine (iCal) - nächster Termin ist mit N markiert
Freitag
03.11.
14:00 - 16:45
Hörsaal 3C, NIG Universitätsstraße 7/Stg. II/3. Stock, 1010 Wien
Samstag
04.11.
14:00 - 16:45
Hörsaal 3C, NIG Universitätsstraße 7/Stg. II/3. Stock, 1010 Wien
Freitag
24.11.
14:00 - 16:45
Hörsaal 3C, NIG Universitätsstraße 7/Stg. II/3. Stock, 1010 Wien
Samstag
25.11.
14:00 - 16:45
Hörsaal 3C, NIG Universitätsstraße 7/Stg. II/3. Stock, 1010 Wien
Freitag
15.12.
14:00 - 16:45
Hörsaal 3C, NIG Universitätsstraße 7/Stg. II/3. Stock, 1010 Wien
Samstag
16.12.
14:00 - 16:45
Hörsaal 3C, NIG Universitätsstraße 7/Stg. II/3. Stock, 1010 Wien
Freitag
19.01.
14:00 - 16:45
Hörsaal 3C, NIG Universitätsstraße 7/Stg. II/3. Stock, 1010 Wien
Samstag
20.01.
14:00 - 16:45
Hörsaal 3C, NIG Universitätsstraße 7/Stg. II/3. Stock, 1010 Wien
Information
Ziele, Inhalte und Methode der Lehrveranstaltung
Art der Leistungskontrolle und erlaubte Hilfsmittel
- Written assignments in between the blocks;
- Writing an essay at the end of the course or giving a presentation during the course.
- Writing an essay at the end of the course or giving a presentation during the course.
Mindestanforderungen und Beurteilungsmaßstab
Prüfungsstoff
The topics and papers discussed during the course.
Literatur
The reading list will be provided during the course. Some of the relevant references:Carrier, Martin (2013). “Values and Objectivity in Science: Value-Ladenness, Pluralism and the Epistemic Attitude”. In: Science & Education 22.10, pp. 2547–2568.
Chang, Hasok (2012). Is Water H2O? Evidence, Pluralism and Realism. Springer.
— (2015). “The Chemical Revolution revisited”. In: Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 49, pp. 91–98.
Kellert, Stephen H., Helen E. Longino, and C. Kenneth Waters, eds. (2006). Scientific pluralism. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Kitcher, Philip (2001). Science, Truth and Democracy. New York: Oxford University Press.
— (2002a). “Reply to Longino”. In: Philosophy of Science 69, pp. 569–572.
— (2002b). “The Third Way: Reflections on Helen Longino’s The Fate of Knowledge”. In: Philosophy of Science 69, pp. 549–559.
Kusch, Martin (2015). “Scientific pluralism and the Chemical Revolution”. In: Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 49, pp. 69–79.
Longino, Helen (2002a). “Reply to Philip Kitcher”. In: Philosophy of Science 69, pp. 573–577.
Longino, Helen E (2002b). “Science and the common good: Thoughts on Philip Kitcher’s Science, Truth, and Democracy”. In: Philosophy of Science 69.4, pp. 560–568.
— (2013). Studying human behavior: how scientists investigate aggression and sexuality. University of Chicago Press.
Rolin, Kristina (2011). “Diversity and Dissent in the Social Sciences: The Case of Organization Studies”. In: Philosophy of the Social Sciences 41.4, pp. 470–494.
Šešelja, Dunja (2017). “Scientific Pluralism and Inconsistency Toleration”. In: Humana.Mente Journal of Philosophical Studies 32, pp. 1–29.
Straßer, Christian, Dunja Šešelja, and Jan Willem Wieland (2015). “Withstanding Tensions: Scientific Disagreement and Epistemic Tolerance”. In: Heuristic Reasoning. Ed. by Emiliano Ippoliti. Studies in Applied Philosophy, Epistemology and Rational Ethics. Springer, pp. 113–146.
Chang, Hasok (2012). Is Water H2O? Evidence, Pluralism and Realism. Springer.
— (2015). “The Chemical Revolution revisited”. In: Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 49, pp. 91–98.
Kellert, Stephen H., Helen E. Longino, and C. Kenneth Waters, eds. (2006). Scientific pluralism. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Kitcher, Philip (2001). Science, Truth and Democracy. New York: Oxford University Press.
— (2002a). “Reply to Longino”. In: Philosophy of Science 69, pp. 569–572.
— (2002b). “The Third Way: Reflections on Helen Longino’s The Fate of Knowledge”. In: Philosophy of Science 69, pp. 549–559.
Kusch, Martin (2015). “Scientific pluralism and the Chemical Revolution”. In: Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 49, pp. 69–79.
Longino, Helen (2002a). “Reply to Philip Kitcher”. In: Philosophy of Science 69, pp. 573–577.
Longino, Helen E (2002b). “Science and the common good: Thoughts on Philip Kitcher’s Science, Truth, and Democracy”. In: Philosophy of Science 69.4, pp. 560–568.
— (2013). Studying human behavior: how scientists investigate aggression and sexuality. University of Chicago Press.
Rolin, Kristina (2011). “Diversity and Dissent in the Social Sciences: The Case of Organization Studies”. In: Philosophy of the Social Sciences 41.4, pp. 470–494.
Šešelja, Dunja (2017). “Scientific Pluralism and Inconsistency Toleration”. In: Humana.Mente Journal of Philosophical Studies 32, pp. 1–29.
Straßer, Christian, Dunja Šešelja, and Jan Willem Wieland (2015). “Withstanding Tensions: Scientific Disagreement and Epistemic Tolerance”. In: Heuristic Reasoning. Ed. by Emiliano Ippoliti. Studies in Applied Philosophy, Epistemology and Rational Ethics. Springer, pp. 113–146.
Zuordnung im Vorlesungsverzeichnis
Letzte Änderung: Mo 07.09.2020 15:36
Scientific pluralism, broadly construed, is the normative idea that a diversity of scientific theories and practices within a given domain is epistemically beneficial. In this course we discuss different conceptions of scientific pluralism proposed in the recent literature. First, students will learn about different types of scientific pluralism (such as the so-called modest and the radical one) and different accounts of scientific pluralism (such as Philip Kitcher's, Helen Longino's, Hasok Chang's, etc.). Second, we will critically examine the normative consequences of these accounts for the central aspects of scientific inquiry, such as scientific objectivity, scientific rationality and epistemic responsibility. We will do so in view of historical and contemporary case studies (e.g. the Chemical Revolution, diversity in the research on human behavior, diversity in medical research etc).
The course will proceed in block classes, during which we will discuss relevant articles (the reading list for each block will be announced in advance).