- 과목명: <과학철학통론1>
- 서울대 과학사 및 과학철학 협동과정 대학원
- 2014년 2학기
- 담당교수: 조인래
1. 수업 과제 & 시험
(1) 발제 및 비평
- 발제 1회와 비평 2회를 기본으로 하되 주제(I, II, III)가 중복되지 않도록 한다.
- 주제 I에서 발제하지 않는 학생들은 모두 주제 I에서 반드시 한 차례의 비평을 해야 한다.
- 발제 기회를 갖지 못할 경우, 비평을 3회 수행해야 한다.
(2) 기말 시험
(3) 기말 보고서
2. 수업 일정
1주. 과학철학의 주요 주제들에 대한 전반적 소개
2주-5주. 과학적 설명
6주-8주. 과학 이론
9주-13주. 과학적 방법
14주. 기말 시험
15주. 기말 보고서
3. 주제
I. 과학적 설명
A. 연역·법칙적 모형
B. 통계적 모형
C. 화용적 모형
D. 인과적 모형
E. 후속 논의
II. 과학 이론
A. 논리경험주의
B. 비판과 대안
III. 과학적 방법
A. 선험적 방법과 귀납적 방법
B. 가설·연역적 방법
C. 귀추적 방법
D. 역사적 접근
E. 과학철학의 자연화
4. 참고문헌
• Brody, B. & Grandy, R. (eds.)(1971/1989), Readings in the Philosophy of Science, 2nd ed., Prentice Hall.
• Boyd, R., Gasper, P. & Trout, J. D.(eds)(1991), The Philosophy of Science, MIT Press.
• Curd, M. & Cover, J. A. (eds.)(1998), Philosophy of Science, Norton.
• Lange, Marc (ed.)(2007), Philosophy of Science: An Anthology, Blackwell.
5. 수업 자료
*는 발제, †는 선택 자료
■ I. 과학적 설명
A. 연역·법칙적 모형
• Hempel, C., Philosophy of Natural Science, Ch. 5.
• Hempel & Oppenhiem, “Studies in the Logic of Explanation”, in Brody & Grandy, pp. 151-155 & 160-163.
*Scriven, M., “Explanation, Predictions, and Laws”, in Pitt (ed.), Theories of Explanation, pp. 67-72.
*Hempel, C., Aspects of Scientific Explanation, pp. 359-376.
B. 통계적 모형
• Hempel, C., Aspects of Scientific Explanation, pp. 381-383 & 394-403.
• Salmon, W. (1971), “Statistical Explanation”, in W. Salmon (ed), Statistical Explanation and Statistical Relevance, pp. 29-87.
C. 화용적 모형
• van Fraassen, B. (1980), The Scientific Image, pp. 103-109, 111-157.
• Achinstein, P. (1983), The Nature of Explanation, pp. 157-164, 181-185.
*Kitcher, P. & Salmon, W. (1987), “Van Fraassen on Explanation”, Journal of Philosophy 84, pp. 315-330.
D. 인과적 모형
• Salmon W. (1984), Scientific Explanation and the Causal Structure of the World, pp. 34-47, 135-147.
†Kitcher, P. (1989), “Explanatory Unification and Causal Structure”, in P. Kitcher & W. Salmon (eds.), Scientific Explanation, Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. XIII, especially pp. 459-475
• Salmon, W. (1994), “Causality without Counterfactuals”, Philosophy of Science 61: 297-312.
*Hitchcock, C. (1995), “Discussion Salmon on Explanatory Relevance”, Philosophy of Science 62: 304-320.
†Salmon, W. (1997), “Causality and Explanation: A Reply to Two Critiques”, Philosophy of Science 64: 461-477.
E. 후속 논의
*Railton, P. (1978), “A Deductive-Nomological Model of Probabilistic Explanation,” Philosophy of Science 45: 206-226.
*Friedman, M. (1974), “Explanation & Scientific Understanding,” Journal of Philosophy 71: 5-19. Reprinted in Pitt, 188-198.
*Cartwright, N., (1980) “The Truth Doesn't Explain Much,” in Brody & Grandy, pp. 184-189.
• Woodward, J. (2003), “The Manipulability Conception of Causal Explanation,” in Curd, Cover & Pincock (eds.)(2013), pp. 735-753.
■ II. 과학 이론
A. 논리경험주의
• Hempel, C., Philosophy of Natural Science, Ch. 6.
• Carnap, R., “Theories as Partially Interpreted Formal System”, in Brody & Grady, pp. 5-12.
†Hempel, C. (1970), “On the ‘Standard Conception’ of Scientific Theories”, in Radner & Winokur (eds.)(1970), Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. IV pp. 142-163.
• Suppe, F., The Structure of Scientific Theories, pp. 16-36, 45-53.
B. 비판과 대안
• Putnam, H., “What theories are not”, in Mathematics, Matter and Method, pp. 215-220.
• Achinstein, P., Concepts of Science, pp. 157-165 & 172-178.
*Suppe, F. (1972), “What’s wrong with the received view on the structure of scientific theories?”, Philosophy of Science 39, 1-19.
†Beatty, J. (1980), “What's wrong with the received view of evolutionary theory?”, in P. D. Asquith & R. Giere (eds.), PSA 1980, vol. 2, PSA, pp. 397-426.
• Giere, R., Explaning Science, Ch. 3, pp. 62-91.
*Machamer, Darden, Craver (2000), “Thinking about Mechanisms”, Philosophy of Science 67: 1-25.
†Churchland, Paul (1989), “On the Nature of Theories: A Neurocomputational Perspective”, in Paul Churchland (1989), A Neurocomputational Perspective: The Nature of Mind and the Structure of Science, MIT, pp. 153-196.
■ III. 과학적 방법
A. 선험적 방법과 귀납적 방법
• Descartes, The Philosophy Works of Descartes (trans. J. Cottingham et al), pp. 143-144 & 240-245.
• Newton, I., Newton's Philosophy of Nature (ed. H. S. Thayer), pp. 3-8.
• Hempel, C. (1966), Philosophy of Natural Science, pp. 10-18.
†McMulin, E.(1990), “Conceptions of Science in the Scientific Revolution”, in Lindberg & Westmen (eds), Reappraisals of the Scientific Revolution, pp. 27-92.
B. 가설·연역적 방법
• Braithwaite, R., Scientific Explanation, pp. 12-21.
• Hempel, Philosophy of Natural Science, Chs.1-3.
• Popper, K., Logic of Scientific Discovery, Ch. I, II, IV & V.
• Glymour, C. (1980), Theory and Evidence, Princeton Univ. Press, pp. 29-48.
†Achinstein, “The Method of Hypothesis: What is it supposed to do, and can it do it?”, in Achinstein & Hannaway (eds.)(1985), Observation, Experiment, and Hypothesis in Modern Physical Science, MIT Press, pp. 127-145.
*Achinstein, P.(2000), “Why Philosophical Theories of Evidence Are (and Ought To Be) Ignored”, Philosophy of Science 67, Supplement, pp. S180-S192.
C. 귀추적 방법
• Hanson, N., “Is There a Logic of Scientific Discovery?”, in Brody & Grandy, Reading in the Philosophy of Science (2nd ed), pp. 398-408.
• Suppe, P., The Structure of Scientific Theories, pp. 151-166.
• Harman, G., “The Inference to the Best Explanation”, in Brody & Grandy, pp. 323-327.
*Curd, M., “The Logic of Discovery: An Analysis of Three Approaches”, in Brody & Grandy, pp. 417-427.
†Langley, P., et al (1987), Scientific Discovery, pp. 44-62.
D. 역사적 접근
• Kuhn, T., The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Chs. 2-4, 9, 10, 12 & Postscript.
*Kuhn, T., “Objectivity, Value Judgment, and Theory Choice”, in T. Kuhn (ed.)(1977), The Essential Tension, University of Chicago Press, pp. 320-339. Reprinted in Curd & Cover (eds.)(1998), pp. 102-118.
• Lakatos, I., “Falsification and the methology of Scientific research programmes”, in Lakatos & Musgrave (eds), Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, pp. 91-159.
• Feyerabend, P., Against Method, Intro.-Ch.5, Chs. 14, 15, 18.
• Suppe, F., The Structure of Scientific Theories, pp. 135-151, 170-180.
†E. 과학철학의 자연화
†Giere R., “Philosophy of Science Naturalized”, in Brody & Grandy, pp. 379-397.
†Laudan, L., “Progress of Rationality? The Prospects for Normative Naturalism”, American Philosophical Quartely 24: 19-31.
(2015.05.23.)
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기