科技哲學
Philosophy of Science and Technology
| 節 | 週五 |
|---|---|
5 13:20–14:10 | 科技哲學 YT104 2 節連堂 |
6 14:20–15:10 |
* 根據陽明交大上課時間表所列
We suppose that science produces understanding about the world as well as useful new technologies and medicines. But how does it work? What exactly are the methods and aims of science? How do scientists know they have enough evidence to stop investigating something? Is science always rational? In what sense is it objective? Should science ever be ethically and politically motivated? This course builds upon insights in traditional and contemporary philosophy of science and technology to examine these questions in depth.
No prerequisites necessary
The goal of the course is to further students’ familiarity with the fundamental assumptions and methods underlying modern science, as well as current issues in philosophy of science and technology. By the end of the course students should be comfortable discussing some of the central problems in contemporary philosophy of science, offering critical responses to proposed solutions to these problems, and using their understanding to engage critically with modern science.
Students are requested to come to each class with 2-3 questions for discussion, and participation will count for 10% of the final grade. Students will be required to write 5 short reflection pieces (at most 2 pages each) (30%). There will be a final take home exam (30%). And there will also be a group project, where an idea from one of the weeks will be applied to an area of interest to the group. This will be presented in class (30%)
| 週次 | 主題 |
|---|---|
| 第 1 週 | Artificial intelligence 1.Film: Her (2013) 2.Film: Ex machina (2014) |
| 第 2 週 | Introduction, overview of course and syllabus |
| 第 3 週 | Modeling in science 1.Morgan, Mary and Margaret Morrison. 1999. Models as Mediators. Introduction. 2.Alexandrova, Anna. 2008. “Making Models Count” Philosophy of Science Vol. 75: 383-404 |
| 第 4 週 | Theory and change in science 1.Bokulich, Alisa, and Devlin, William. 2015. Kuhn’s Structure of Scientific Revolutions – 50 Years On. Introduction. 2.Morrison, Margaret. 2007. “Where Have All the Theories Gone?” Philosophy of Science 74: 195-228. |
| 第 5 週 | Laws of nature 1.Cartwright, Nancy. 1998. “Do the Laws of Physics State the Facts?” in M. Curd & J. A. Cover (eds.), Philosophy of Science: The Central Issues, 865-877. 2.Mitchell, Sandra. 2000. “Dimensions of Scientific Laws” Philosophy of Science 67: 242-265 3.Optional: Woody, Andrea. 2014. “Chemistry’s Periodic Law” in Science after the Practice Turn in Philosophy, History, and the Social Studies of Science, edited by L. Soler, S. Zwart, V. Israel- Jost, and M. Lynch. |
| 第 6 週 | Experiment 1.Patton, Lydia. 2012. “Experiment and Theory Building” Synthese 184: 235 2.Franklin, L.R. 2005. “Exploratory Experiments” Philosophy of Science 72: 888-899 |
| 第 7 週 | Experiment and simulation 1.Morgan, Mary. 2003. “Experiments Without Material Intervention” in Radder (ed.) The Philosophy of Scientific Experimentation, 216-235 2.Parke, Emily. 2014. “Experiments, Simulations and Epistemic Privilege,” Philosophy of Science 81: 516-536 |
| 第 8 週 | Evidential reasoning 1.Mayo, Deborah. 1988. “Toward a More Objective Understanding of the Evidence of Carcinogenic Risk” PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association: 489-503 2.Lloyd, Elizabeth and Wendy Parker. 2009. “Confirmation and Climate Models” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume lxxxiii |
| 第 9 週 | Explanation 1.Ben-Menahem, Yemina. 1990. “Inference to the Best Explanation” Erkenntnis 33: 319-44 2.Bokulich, Alisa. 2011. “How Scientific Models Can Explain” Synthese 180: 33-45 3.Optional: Woody, Andrea. 2015. “Re-orienting Discussions of Scientific Explanation: A Functional Perspective.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 52: 79-87. |
| 第 10 週 | Epistemological aims of science 1.Elgin, Catherine. 2017. True Enough. Introduction. 2. Potochnik, Angela. 2017. “Science Isn’t after the Truth,” Chapter 4 of Idealization and the Aims of Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. |
| 第 11 週 | Values in science 1.Longino, Helen. 1990. Science as Social Knowledge. Introduction. 2.Douglas, Heather. 2000. “Inductive Risk and Values in Science” Philosophy of Science 67: 559-579 3.Optional: Wylie, Alison. 2007. “Coming to Terms with the Values of Science” in Value-Free Science: Ideals and Illusions? Edited by Harold Kincaid, John Dupre, and Alison Wylie |
| 第 12 週 | Technology 1.Marx, L. 2010. “Technology: The emergence of a hazardous concept.” Technology and Culture. 50(3). 561-577. 2.Code of ethics for engineers: https://www.nspe.org/sites/default/files/resources/pdfs/Ethics/CodeofEthics/NSPECodeofEthicsforEngineers.pdf |
| 第 13 週 | Dewey and technology 1.Dewey, John. “Science and Society.” In John Dewey: The Later Works, 1925-1953: 1931-1932, Vol. 6 – Southern Illinois University Press. 2.Hickman, Larry. 2009. “John Dewey as Philosopher of Technology.” Readings in the Philosophy of Technology, by David M. Kaplan, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, pp. 43–55. |
| 第 14 週 | Can artifacts be ethical, political, or racist? 1.Langdon Winner, “Do Artifacts Have Politics?” 2. Liao, S., & Huebner, B. 2020/ “Oppressive Things.” Philos Phenomenol Res. 00: 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/phpr.12701 |
| 第 15 週 | Cyborgs 1.Clark, Andy. 2003. Natural-Born Cyborgs, Chapter 1: Cyborgs Unplugged. 2.Haraway, Donna. A manifesto for cyborgs: Science, technology, and Socialist feminism in the 1980s. Simians, Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature. Routled |
| 第 16 週 | Killer robots 1.Sparrow, Robert. 2007. “Killer Robots,” Journal of Applied Philosophy, 24 (1): 62-77. 2.Musgrave, Zach and Roberts, Bryan W. 2015. “Humans, Not Robots, Are the Real Reason Artificial Intelligence Is Scary.” The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2015/08/humans-not-robots-are-the-real-reason-artificial-intelligence-is-scary/400994/ |
| 第 17 週 | Robot rights 1.Bryson, J. 2010. “Robots Should Be Slaves.” In Close Engagements with Artificial Companions, Y. Wilks (ed.), pp 63-74. 2.Schwitzgebel, Eric and Garza, Mara. 2015. “A Defense of the Rights of Artificial Intelligence.” Midwest Studies in Philosophy 39: 98-119. |
| 第 18 週 | Science from the inside, and from the outside 1.Film: The imitation game (2014) 2.Film: Behind the curve (2018) |
- 地點
- Online
- 時間
- By email appointment
- 聯絡方式
- mikestuart@nycu.edu.tw