180164 EK Methods and Problems (2023W)
Continuous assessment of course work
Labels
OV
Hinweis der SPL Philosophie:Das Abgeben von ganz oder teilweise von einem KI-tool (z.B. ChatGPT) verfassten Texten als Leistungsnachweis (z.B. Seminararbeit) ist nur dann erlaubt, wenn dies von der Lehrveranstaltungsleitung ausdrücklich als mögliche Arbeitsweise genehmigt wurde. Auch hierbei müssen direkt oder indirekt zitierte Textstellen wie immer klar mit Quellenangabe ausgewiesen werden.Die Lehrveranstaltungsleitung kann zur Überprüfung der Autorenschaft einer abgegebenen schriftlichen Arbeit ein notenrelevantes Gespräch (Plausibilitätsprüfung) vorsehen, das erfolgreich zu absolvieren ist.
Registration/Deregistration
Note: The time of your registration within the registration period has no effect on the allocation of places (no first come, first served).
- Registration is open from Mo 04.09.2023 09:00 to Su 10.09.2023 23:59
- Registration is open from Mo 18.09.2023 09:00 to Su 24.09.2023 23:59
- Deregistration possible until Tu 31.10.2023 23:59
Details
max. 30 participants
Language: German
Lecturers
Classes (iCal) - next class is marked with N
The course is in-person.
Monday
09.10.
09:45 - 11:15
Hörsaal 3F NIG 3.Stock
Monday
16.10.
09:45 - 11:15
Hörsaal 3F NIG 3.Stock
Monday
23.10.
09:45 - 11:15
Hörsaal 3F NIG 3.Stock
Monday
30.10.
09:45 - 11:15
Hörsaal 3F NIG 3.Stock
Monday
06.11.
09:45 - 11:15
Hörsaal 3F NIG 3.Stock
Monday
13.11.
09:45 - 11:15
Hörsaal 3F NIG 3.Stock
Monday
20.11.
09:45 - 11:15
Hörsaal 3F NIG 3.Stock
Monday
27.11.
09:45 - 11:15
Hörsaal 3F NIG 3.Stock
Monday
04.12.
09:45 - 11:15
Hörsaal 3F NIG 3.Stock
Monday
11.12.
09:45 - 11:15
Hörsaal 3F NIG 3.Stock
Monday
08.01.
09:45 - 11:15
Hörsaal 3F NIG 3.Stock
Monday
15.01.
09:45 - 11:15
Hörsaal 3F NIG 3.Stock
Monday
22.01.
09:45 - 11:15
Hörsaal 3F NIG 3.Stock
Monday
29.01.
09:45 - 11:15
Hörsaal 3F NIG 3.Stock
Information
Aims, contents and method of the course
This is a course introducing you to history, philosophy and sociology of science and technology. It is taught in German.
Assessment and permitted materials
Evaluation of the participation in discussions (20% of the overall mark), of the prepared and uploaded questions (20%) as well as the essay (of about 20 pages, Font 12, Times New Roman) (60%). You have to upload question at least 10 times. By registering for this course you agree that the automated plagiarism software Turnitin will check all of your written work for this course.
Minimum requirements and assessment criteria
Regular attendance (not more than once without a doctor's note); punctual attendance; care (in reading the work of other and regarding one's own presentation); argumentative engagement with others' ideas; regular uploading of questions (at least 10 times) -- Independent essay on one of the topics of the course.The essay should discuss one of the questions raised in the seminar, and it should be based primarily on the literature discussed in class. It could be, e.g., a critique of one of the positions introduced, or an attempt to "decide" one of the debates covered in the seminar.The overall mark consists of three components:Mark for the essay: 60% i.e. 60 points
Mark for the questions/comments: 20% i.e. 20 points
Mark for participation in classroom discussion: 20% i.e. 20 pointsYour need at least 40 points to complete the course.
All components have to be delivered for there to be a final mark.Scale for the marks:
1: 85-100 points
2: 70-84 points
3: 55-69 points
4: 40-54 points
5: 0-39 points
Mark for the questions/comments: 20% i.e. 20 points
Mark for participation in classroom discussion: 20% i.e. 20 pointsYour need at least 40 points to complete the course.
All components have to be delivered for there to be a final mark.Scale for the marks:
1: 85-100 points
2: 70-84 points
3: 55-69 points
4: 40-54 points
5: 0-39 points
Examination topics
There is no exam.
Reading list
(1) Geschichte:
(a) T. S. Kuhn, “Scientific Knowledge as Historical Product”, in T.S. Kuhn, The Last Writings of Thomas S. Kuhn, ed. by B. Mladenovic, Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 2022, 1-18
(b) L. Fleck, “The problem of epistemology” (1936), in R. S. Cohen and T. Schnelle (eds.), Cognition and Fact: Materials on Ludwik Fleck, Dordrecht: Reidel, 1986, 79-112.(2) Realismus:
(a) J. Worrall, „Structural Realism: The Best of Both Worlds?“ in M. Lange (ed.), Philosophy of Science: An Anthology, Oxford, Blackwell, 2007, 262-277.
(b) L. Laudan, „A Confutation of Convergent Realism“, in M. Curd & J. A. Cover (eds.), Philosophy of Science: The Central Issues, New York, 1998, 1114-1135.(3) Modelle:
(a) M. Morgan, “Learning from Models”, in M. S. Morgan and M. Morrison (eds.), Models as Mediators: Perspectives on Natural and Social Science, Cambridge, Cambridge UP, 1999: 347-388.
(b) T. Knuuttila, “Modeling and representing: an artefactual approach”, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 42 (2011): 262–271.(4) Experimente:
(a) S. Shapin and S. Schaffer, “Seeing and Believing”, Shapin and Schaffer, Leviathan and the Air-Pump, Harvard, 1985: 22-78.
(b) H. M. Collins, “Detecting Gravitational Radiation: The Experimenters’ Regress, in Collins, Changing Order: Replication and Induction in Scientific Practice, Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 1992: 79-111.(5) Objektivität:
(a) L. Daston and P. Galison, “The Image of Objectivity”, Representations 40 (1992): 81-128.
(b) I. Koskinen, “Defending a Risk Account of Scientific Objectivity”, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 71 (2020): 1187-1207.(6) Werte:
(a) H. Longino, “Values, heuristics and the politics of knowledge”, Scientiae Studia 15(1) (2017): 39-57.
(b) H. Douglas, “Risk and Values in Science”, Philosophy of Science 67 (2000): 559-579.(7) Historische Epistemologie:
(a) G. Canguilhem, “The Living and Its Milieu”, in Canguilhem, Knowledge of Life, New York, 2008, 98-120.
(b) J. Schickore, “The Significance of Re-Doing Experiments: A Contribution to Historically Informed Methodology”, Erkenntnis 75 (2011): 325-347.(8) Feministische Umweltforschung:
(a) C. Merchant, “Dominion over Nature”, in Merchant, The Death of Nature: Women, Ecology, and the Scientific Revolution, San Francisco, 1980, 164-191.
(b) C. Merchant, “The Mechanical Order”, in Merchant, The Death of Nature: Women, Ecology, and the Scientific Revolution, San Francisco, 1980, 192-216.(9) Technik:
(a) T. Pinch and W. Bijker, “The Social Construction of Facts and Artefacts: Or How the Sociology of Science and the Sociology of Technology Might Benefit Each Other‘, Social Studies of Science14(3)(1984): 399-44.
(b) J. Wajcman, “Feminist Theories of Technology”, Cambridge Journal of Economics 34 (2010): 143-152.(10) Actor-Network Theorie:
(a) B. Latour, “Circulating Reference: Sampling the Soil in the Amazon Forest”, in B. Latour, Pandora’s Hope: Essays on the Reality of Science Studies, Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 1999, 24-79.
(b) B. Latour, “Why Has Critique Run out of Steam? From Matters of Fact to Matters of Concern”, Critical Inquiry 30 (2004): 225-248.(11) Ontological Politics:
(a) Mol, A., “Ontological Politics. A Word and Some Questions”, The Sociological Review 47 (1999): 74–89.
(b) Woolgar, S. and J. Lezaun, “The wrong bin bag: A turn to ontology in science and technology studies?” Social Studies of Science 43 (2013): 321-340.(12) Feminismus / Formen des Wissens:
(a) M. Puig de la Bellacasa, “Matters of Care in Technoscience: Assembling Neglected Things”, Social Studies of Science 41 (2011): 85–106.
(b) D. Ludwig and D. A. Weiskopf, “Ethnoontology: Ways of world-building across cultures”, Philosophy Compass 2019: 1-11.(13) Pluralism/Perspectivism:
(a) M. Massimi, “Realism, perspectivism, and disagreement in science”, Synthese 21: 56115-56141.
(b) H. Chang, “Pluralism in Science: A Call to Action”, in: Is Water H2O?
(a) T. S. Kuhn, “Scientific Knowledge as Historical Product”, in T.S. Kuhn, The Last Writings of Thomas S. Kuhn, ed. by B. Mladenovic, Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 2022, 1-18
(b) L. Fleck, “The problem of epistemology” (1936), in R. S. Cohen and T. Schnelle (eds.), Cognition and Fact: Materials on Ludwik Fleck, Dordrecht: Reidel, 1986, 79-112.(2) Realismus:
(a) J. Worrall, „Structural Realism: The Best of Both Worlds?“ in M. Lange (ed.), Philosophy of Science: An Anthology, Oxford, Blackwell, 2007, 262-277.
(b) L. Laudan, „A Confutation of Convergent Realism“, in M. Curd & J. A. Cover (eds.), Philosophy of Science: The Central Issues, New York, 1998, 1114-1135.(3) Modelle:
(a) M. Morgan, “Learning from Models”, in M. S. Morgan and M. Morrison (eds.), Models as Mediators: Perspectives on Natural and Social Science, Cambridge, Cambridge UP, 1999: 347-388.
(b) T. Knuuttila, “Modeling and representing: an artefactual approach”, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 42 (2011): 262–271.(4) Experimente:
(a) S. Shapin and S. Schaffer, “Seeing and Believing”, Shapin and Schaffer, Leviathan and the Air-Pump, Harvard, 1985: 22-78.
(b) H. M. Collins, “Detecting Gravitational Radiation: The Experimenters’ Regress, in Collins, Changing Order: Replication and Induction in Scientific Practice, Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 1992: 79-111.(5) Objektivität:
(a) L. Daston and P. Galison, “The Image of Objectivity”, Representations 40 (1992): 81-128.
(b) I. Koskinen, “Defending a Risk Account of Scientific Objectivity”, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 71 (2020): 1187-1207.(6) Werte:
(a) H. Longino, “Values, heuristics and the politics of knowledge”, Scientiae Studia 15(1) (2017): 39-57.
(b) H. Douglas, “Risk and Values in Science”, Philosophy of Science 67 (2000): 559-579.(7) Historische Epistemologie:
(a) G. Canguilhem, “The Living and Its Milieu”, in Canguilhem, Knowledge of Life, New York, 2008, 98-120.
(b) J. Schickore, “The Significance of Re-Doing Experiments: A Contribution to Historically Informed Methodology”, Erkenntnis 75 (2011): 325-347.(8) Feministische Umweltforschung:
(a) C. Merchant, “Dominion over Nature”, in Merchant, The Death of Nature: Women, Ecology, and the Scientific Revolution, San Francisco, 1980, 164-191.
(b) C. Merchant, “The Mechanical Order”, in Merchant, The Death of Nature: Women, Ecology, and the Scientific Revolution, San Francisco, 1980, 192-216.(9) Technik:
(a) T. Pinch and W. Bijker, “The Social Construction of Facts and Artefacts: Or How the Sociology of Science and the Sociology of Technology Might Benefit Each Other‘, Social Studies of Science14(3)(1984): 399-44.
(b) J. Wajcman, “Feminist Theories of Technology”, Cambridge Journal of Economics 34 (2010): 143-152.(10) Actor-Network Theorie:
(a) B. Latour, “Circulating Reference: Sampling the Soil in the Amazon Forest”, in B. Latour, Pandora’s Hope: Essays on the Reality of Science Studies, Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 1999, 24-79.
(b) B. Latour, “Why Has Critique Run out of Steam? From Matters of Fact to Matters of Concern”, Critical Inquiry 30 (2004): 225-248.(11) Ontological Politics:
(a) Mol, A., “Ontological Politics. A Word and Some Questions”, The Sociological Review 47 (1999): 74–89.
(b) Woolgar, S. and J. Lezaun, “The wrong bin bag: A turn to ontology in science and technology studies?” Social Studies of Science 43 (2013): 321-340.(12) Feminismus / Formen des Wissens:
(a) M. Puig de la Bellacasa, “Matters of Care in Technoscience: Assembling Neglected Things”, Social Studies of Science 41 (2011): 85–106.
(b) D. Ludwig and D. A. Weiskopf, “Ethnoontology: Ways of world-building across cultures”, Philosophy Compass 2019: 1-11.(13) Pluralism/Perspectivism:
(a) M. Massimi, “Realism, perspectivism, and disagreement in science”, Synthese 21: 56115-56141.
(b) H. Chang, “Pluralism in Science: A Call to Action”, in: Is Water H2O?
Association in the course directory
Last modified: Th 28.09.2023 17:07