POSE Summary
Summary Philosophy of Science and Ethics
Contents:
1. Pigilucci (2010) – Pseudoscience
2. Okasha - Phil of Science Ch 1-3
3. Okasha - Phil of Science ch 4-7
4. Lectures 1-5
5. Blackburn – Being Good
6. DeGrazia – Animal Ethics ch 1-7
7. Garvey – environmental ethics ch 1-6
8. Lectures 6-12
,POSE Summary
Pigilucci (2010) – Pseudoscience_________________________________________________
Pseudoscience definition: sounds like science, is not science.
Everyone has the right to be irrational, (e.g. listening to an astrologer, etc) but rampant
irrationality in a society can be highly wasteful and destructive.
Superstition can be dangerous to the point of lethality (AIDS Denialism)
Astrology is a good example of pseudoscience: it can be tested
- Star constellations don’t exist because they are all at vastly different distances from
earth.
Ufology: study of report of UFO’s
Logical fallacy:
- Post hoc ergo propter hoc: after this, therefore because this
Occam’s razor: explanation which requires the least amount of unwarranted assumptions
Ufologists defense mechanisms:
- Calling on an ‘authority’ → these often do not have expertise in atmospheric or
astronomical phenomena.
- Affirming the consequences → ‘the universe is so large there must be other life
forms, so they must be visiting us’
- Bandwagon appeal → ‘so many people believe in UFO’s, there must be something
real to it’ i.e. widespread beliefs which aren’t necessarily true (E.g. earth centre
universe)
- Conspirational approach → ‘the government knows but won’t tell us’
- Salvational appeal → crosses the path of religion, ‘they are here to save us’
When one runs a very large number of experiments, one is bound to find significant (but
very small) results even though nothing paranormal is going on, as long as there is even a
very small bias in the experimental setup.
,POSE Summary
Okasha - Philosophy of Science Ch 1-3___________________________________________
Chapter 1: what is science?
Science uses different methods than humanities, namely experiments. However, scientists
also rely on observation and theory construction.
Scientific revolution: 1500-1750
1.1 origins of modern science
Aristotle
- At first very important
- Geocentric view
- 4 elements
Nicholas Copernicus (1473-1543)
- Copernican revolution
- Attacked the geocentric model of the universe
o Heliocentric model
- Led to the development of the works of Johannes Kepler and Galileo Galilei
Galileo Galilei
- Pioneer of modern physics and science
- Galileo’s law of free fall (everything falls at the same speed)
Renee Descartes (1596-1650)
- Mechanical philosophy
Isaac Newton (1643-1727)
- Agreed with MP: universe consists of particles in motion
- Newton’s laws
- New framework of physics for the next 200 years, replacing Cartesian physics
- However, not applicable with quantum mechanics and the relativity theory
- Book: mathematical principles of Natural Philosophy (1687)
Charles Darwin
- Book: Origin of Species (1859)
o Not by God
o Natural selection
1.2 What is philosophy of science?
A scientist might yield the same results a couple of times and consider it right. The
philosopher will wonder why they would assume that future repetitions will have the same
result and how they know this is true.
- Question assumptions scientists take for granted
, POSE Summary
1.3 Science and pseudo-science
Karl Popper
- Fundamental feature of a scientific theory is that it should be falsifiable → if it can
be disproved. If a theory cannot be proved wrong, it is not a good theory
- Quite simplistic
o Marxists stuck to communism, even if it didn’t work (Popper would call this
pseudoscience)
o Adams and Leverrier figured out that using Newtons theory of gravity and
figured out it didn’t work on Uranus – stuck to the theory and figured out
that there must be another planet (pluto) pseudoscience according to
Popper but he’s not right, this is good science
Chapter 2: Scientific inference
1.1 Deduction and induction
Deductive inference: truth of the premises guarantees the truth of the conclusion
Inductive inference: premises of the inference is true, yet the conclusion false
- Move from premises about objects that have been examined to conclusions about
the same sorts of objects which haven’t been examined
o E.g. they tested a large number of people for an extra chromosome with
Down syndrome – thus all people with DS must have an extra chromosome
even though they haven’t been checked.
o All tested X have been Y, so the other X are also Y
2.2 Humes Problem
David Hume (1711-1776)
- Argued that the use of induction cannot be rationally justified at all
- Based on uniformity of nature (all similar objects will act similar)
- For to argue that induction is trustworthy because it has worked well up to now is to
reason inductively. Hume’s fundamental point, because he already doesn’t like
induction
- ‘Hume’s problem of induction’
2.3 Inference to the best explanation
Inference to the best explanation (IBE): type of inductive inference
- The explanation which most logically fits
- = reasoning from one’s data to a theory or hypothesis that explains the data
- A good explanation should be simple (parsimonious) → one cause is more likely than
two
- Also called abduction
- Educated guess
2.4 causal inference
Correlation does not mean causation
- RCT (randomized controlled trial) → used a lot in medicine
Summary Philosophy of Science and Ethics
Contents:
1. Pigilucci (2010) – Pseudoscience
2. Okasha - Phil of Science Ch 1-3
3. Okasha - Phil of Science ch 4-7
4. Lectures 1-5
5. Blackburn – Being Good
6. DeGrazia – Animal Ethics ch 1-7
7. Garvey – environmental ethics ch 1-6
8. Lectures 6-12
,POSE Summary
Pigilucci (2010) – Pseudoscience_________________________________________________
Pseudoscience definition: sounds like science, is not science.
Everyone has the right to be irrational, (e.g. listening to an astrologer, etc) but rampant
irrationality in a society can be highly wasteful and destructive.
Superstition can be dangerous to the point of lethality (AIDS Denialism)
Astrology is a good example of pseudoscience: it can be tested
- Star constellations don’t exist because they are all at vastly different distances from
earth.
Ufology: study of report of UFO’s
Logical fallacy:
- Post hoc ergo propter hoc: after this, therefore because this
Occam’s razor: explanation which requires the least amount of unwarranted assumptions
Ufologists defense mechanisms:
- Calling on an ‘authority’ → these often do not have expertise in atmospheric or
astronomical phenomena.
- Affirming the consequences → ‘the universe is so large there must be other life
forms, so they must be visiting us’
- Bandwagon appeal → ‘so many people believe in UFO’s, there must be something
real to it’ i.e. widespread beliefs which aren’t necessarily true (E.g. earth centre
universe)
- Conspirational approach → ‘the government knows but won’t tell us’
- Salvational appeal → crosses the path of religion, ‘they are here to save us’
When one runs a very large number of experiments, one is bound to find significant (but
very small) results even though nothing paranormal is going on, as long as there is even a
very small bias in the experimental setup.
,POSE Summary
Okasha - Philosophy of Science Ch 1-3___________________________________________
Chapter 1: what is science?
Science uses different methods than humanities, namely experiments. However, scientists
also rely on observation and theory construction.
Scientific revolution: 1500-1750
1.1 origins of modern science
Aristotle
- At first very important
- Geocentric view
- 4 elements
Nicholas Copernicus (1473-1543)
- Copernican revolution
- Attacked the geocentric model of the universe
o Heliocentric model
- Led to the development of the works of Johannes Kepler and Galileo Galilei
Galileo Galilei
- Pioneer of modern physics and science
- Galileo’s law of free fall (everything falls at the same speed)
Renee Descartes (1596-1650)
- Mechanical philosophy
Isaac Newton (1643-1727)
- Agreed with MP: universe consists of particles in motion
- Newton’s laws
- New framework of physics for the next 200 years, replacing Cartesian physics
- However, not applicable with quantum mechanics and the relativity theory
- Book: mathematical principles of Natural Philosophy (1687)
Charles Darwin
- Book: Origin of Species (1859)
o Not by God
o Natural selection
1.2 What is philosophy of science?
A scientist might yield the same results a couple of times and consider it right. The
philosopher will wonder why they would assume that future repetitions will have the same
result and how they know this is true.
- Question assumptions scientists take for granted
, POSE Summary
1.3 Science and pseudo-science
Karl Popper
- Fundamental feature of a scientific theory is that it should be falsifiable → if it can
be disproved. If a theory cannot be proved wrong, it is not a good theory
- Quite simplistic
o Marxists stuck to communism, even if it didn’t work (Popper would call this
pseudoscience)
o Adams and Leverrier figured out that using Newtons theory of gravity and
figured out it didn’t work on Uranus – stuck to the theory and figured out
that there must be another planet (pluto) pseudoscience according to
Popper but he’s not right, this is good science
Chapter 2: Scientific inference
1.1 Deduction and induction
Deductive inference: truth of the premises guarantees the truth of the conclusion
Inductive inference: premises of the inference is true, yet the conclusion false
- Move from premises about objects that have been examined to conclusions about
the same sorts of objects which haven’t been examined
o E.g. they tested a large number of people for an extra chromosome with
Down syndrome – thus all people with DS must have an extra chromosome
even though they haven’t been checked.
o All tested X have been Y, so the other X are also Y
2.2 Humes Problem
David Hume (1711-1776)
- Argued that the use of induction cannot be rationally justified at all
- Based on uniformity of nature (all similar objects will act similar)
- For to argue that induction is trustworthy because it has worked well up to now is to
reason inductively. Hume’s fundamental point, because he already doesn’t like
induction
- ‘Hume’s problem of induction’
2.3 Inference to the best explanation
Inference to the best explanation (IBE): type of inductive inference
- The explanation which most logically fits
- = reasoning from one’s data to a theory or hypothesis that explains the data
- A good explanation should be simple (parsimonious) → one cause is more likely than
two
- Also called abduction
- Educated guess
2.4 causal inference
Correlation does not mean causation
- RCT (randomized controlled trial) → used a lot in medicine
