B4964 - Philosophy of Scienze in Practice (1) (LM)

Learning outcomes

The main objective of this course is to provide students a solid understanding of some key issues raised in the philosophical analysis of scientific practice. Fundamental topics such as experimentation and laboratory activity in science, measurement, error, the relationship between epistemic and non-epistemic values, decision processes and bias in science will be addressed. By the end of the course, students will have developed a thorough understanding of the main debates on these issues and will be able to discuss and analyse them in a critical way.

Course contents

The course will explore the inherent tension between key traditional notions in philosophy of science – such as truth, objectivity, and value-freedom – and how these notions are upheld by scientific theory and practice. We will focus on the historical as well philosophical reasons behind the success of these notions in Western philosophy of science, and then we will delve into the reasons for being skeptical and/or critical about them. We will also analyze a wide range of case studies from different scientific disciplines to explore how these notions and values play out in practice.

Throughout the course we will tackle the following set of questions: Does science aim at truth? Should science be value-free and objective? What are the theoretical assumptions behind the notion of reduction? What is the role played by values such as coherence, unity, and simplicity?

Following a general introduction on the key notions of Western philosophy of science (Week #1), the class will follow a dialectical format. Each week will be devoted to a specific notion or value, which will be first introduced within its historical and philosophical context (Day 1: thesis) and then debunked through a key piece of philosophical writing (Day 2: antithesis). We will conclude each week with the discussion of a case study from a specific discipline, where we will assess how the tension between the traditional notions and their respective objections plays out in practice (Day 3: synthesis). Following this methodology, we will address philosophical debates about truth (Elgin 2017; Potochnik 2017), value-freedom and objectivity (Marx 1845 & 1846; Longino 1990; Putnam 2002; Criado-Perez 2019), reduction (Comte 1854; Quine 1951; Kitcher 1992), coherence, unity, and simplicity (Dupré 1995; Leonelli 2022).

The final syllabus, including the complete list of readings and assignments, will be provided on the first day of class and then uploaded to Virtuale.

Readings/Bibliography

Below you can find some of the core readings we will discuss during the class, and additional recommendations will be provided during the course. All the readings and relevant chapters will be made available on Virtuale on the first week of class.

Required Readings

• Potochnik, A., Colombo, M. & Wright, C. (2019). Recipes for Science: An Introduction to Scientific Methods and Reasoning. Routledge. (excerpts)
• Elgin, C. (2017) True Enough. Oxford University Press. (excerpts)
• Potochnik, A. (2017). Idealization and the Aims of Science. Chicago University Press. (excerpts)
• Putnam, H. (2002). The Collapse of the Fact/Value Dichotomy and Other Essays. Harvard University Press. (excerpts)
• Longino, H. (1990). Science as Social Knowledge. Princeton University Press. (excerpts)
• Dupré, J. (1995). The Disorder of Things: Metaphysical Foundations of the Disunity of Science. Harvard University Press. (excerpts)

Additional readings

• Anderson, E. (2004). Uses of value judgments in science: A general argument, with lessons from a case study of feminist research on divorce. Hypatia
• Elgin, C. (2009). Is Understanding Factive? In Epistemic Value, ed. Duncan Pritchard, Allan Miller, Adrian Hadock. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009, pp. 322-330.
• Marx, K. (1845). Theses on Feuerbach.
• Marx, K. & Engels, F. (1845-6). The German Ideology. (excerpts)
• Comte, A. (1854). System of Positive Polity. (excerpts)
• Kitcher, P. (1992). Freud's Dream: A Complete Interdisciplinary Science of Mind. MIT Press (Ch. 2)
• Quine, W. V. O. (1951). Two Dogmas of Empiricism. The Philosophical Review.
• Criado-Perez, C. (2019). Invisible Women: Data Bias in a World Designed for Men. Vintage. (excerpts)
• Leonelli, S. (2022). Open Science and Epistemic Diversity: Friends or Foes? Philosophy of Science.

Teaching methods

I am committed to making this class an interactive, fruitful, and effective learning experience. This a discussion-based class, where more traditional – but still interactive – lectures will be complemented by debates, exchange of ideas, class presentations, and a wide range of in-class and take-home activities.

Special attention will be devoted to the development of core philosophical skills such as reading, writing, and debating through the discussion of the class topics. More details on class format will be introduced during the first day of class, part of which will be devoted to the illustration of the teaching methodology.

Assessment methods

The final grade will result from various components, including:

a) Participation in the in-class activities, including the submission of mini-assignments throughout the course (20%);

b) In-class presentation on one paper or case study over the course of the class (30%). Each presentation should include a brief summary of the main argument, a short discussion of 2-3 points of the text that you find interesting or relevant, and some further questions that will fuel class discussion. Be prepared to talk for 15-20 minutes, and to lead a short discussion afterwards. Presentation and discussion times may vary and will be established based on the class size.

c) Final paper project (50%): You will be required to write a 5,000 word paper (about 8-10 pages) based on one or more topics discussed in class. During the last week of class, we will have the chance to discuss the outline of your paper, so that we can devote some time to strengthening your argument. The paper should be sent to the instructor via email no later than 10 days before the relevant exam date.

Students who are not participating in the class are encouraged to get in touch with the instructor to talk about alternative ways of assessing preparation. You can set up an appointment on my webpage.

Excellent grades (28-30, A equivalent) will be assigned to students who demonstrate a thorough knowledge of the material discussed in class, critical thinking and analytical skills, and the ability to express concepts clearly and convincingly. Average to good grades (23-27, B equivalent) will be assigned to students who exhibit good understanding of the material but fall short of conceptual elaboration and/or connections among the topics discussed throughout the course – e.g., they present the material piecemeal but fail to see how it hangs together. Students who exhibit superficial knowledge, gaps in preparation, poor critical and analytical skills will receive average to low grades (18-22, C equivalent). Severe gaps in one or more of the areas listed above can result in a failing grade (below 18, D or F equivalent).

Exam sessions
During the 2025/2026 academic year, exam sessions will be scheduled in the following months: December, January, March, June, July, September

Students with disabilities

Students with disabilities have the right to special adjustments according to their condition, following an assessment by the University Service for Students with Disabilities. Please do not contact the instructor, but get in touch with the University Service directly to determine the appropriate adjustments. The Service will then determine what adjustments are appropriate, and get in touch with the teacher. For more information, please visit the page:

https://site.unibo.it/studenti-con-disabilita-e-dsa/en/for-students 

Students should contact the University Service in advance: any proposed adjustment must be submitted at least 15 days before the exam for the instructor’s approval, who will evaluate the appropriateness in relation to the learning objectives of the course.

Teaching tools

I will avail myself of a wide range of tools to support teaching and facilitate participation while acknowledging a variety of learning styles. Besides Power point and Prezi, I will use paper handouts as well as softwares such as Slido, Kahoot, and Wooclap.

Office hours

See the website of Valentina Petrolini