Syllabus: Philosophy 309B,
Perspectives: Science, Social Science, Humanities
Spring 98, 9:00 MWF in UANX 125; Prof. J.W. Powell, phone 5753; Office hours 10 MW(not
F), 12-2 Tues. and by appt. in 110 UANX. Your odds are good of catching me anytime I'm not
teaching. E-mail jwp2@axe.humboldt.edu.
Description: This course is a critical inquiry into divisions among the academic disciplines and into the things they have in common. We will think about the practices and the theories of science and social sciences, and then about the defining characteristics of the humanities. Are the sciences one thing? Are scientists value-free? Are social scientists doing anything in common with physicists? When we condemn some claims as unscientific, does that mean that art or religion also stand condemned? When we argue about art or music, are there any scientific grounds, or anything like scientific grounds, we can use? If a dog may gaze on the queen, may an artist gaze on a mathematician? To what extent can there be a common language among sculptors and geneticists? Dancers and historians? Actors and marine biologists? Is there something sexist about science? Is there something terminally fluffy about the arts? Then we are going to think about the whole. What is an education for? To what extent does an educated person need to know about all these disciplines? Are there natural or defensible boundaries among the disciplines? If we deny the boundaries or try to do interdisciplinary work, what results or value might we find and what must we give up?
The interests of the students in the course will help us choose the examples we use as we take up these and other questions. We will work with some themes or topics where the different kinds of disciplines have done work and their approaches can be compared. Some for us to consider include the following:
1. The study from different points of view of ecology and environmental issues and values, including questions about whether science hinders some proper approach to those (must a biologist be an environmentalist? or the reverse?);
2. The study of the fine arts, in particular perhaps painting, with some work on definition of art and the significance of scientific and social-scientific study of art;
3. The relation of logic to scientific method, and the question of limits of logic;
4. Language as an object or subject for investigation;
5. Madness [this is a purposefully broad term, covering mental illness, wars, clinical depression, severe eccentricity, maybe artistic genius, and so on and on] as a subject of study, and the responses from the sciences, social sciences, and humanities.
6. The study of definitions; the study of dichotomies.
My aim is to make this a central part of a University education. You will have opportunity to
learn about some central issues and arguments which have shaped the intellectual landscape we
inhabit in 1998, and learn skills in articulation and appraisal of arguments which will be useful to
you both in your HSU coursework and in your life after you leave. Finally, I hope to make
thinking into an addiction by helping you find that it can be enjoyable, productive, and profoundly
satisfying.
Materials: Introductory Readings in Philosophy of Science, rev. edition, edited by Klemke, Kline,
and Hollinger (Prometheus Books: NYC, 1988); Philosophy of Social Science 2nd. Ed. by
Alexander Rosenberg (Westview: Boulder, 1995); and Aesthetics, by Anne Sheppard (Oxford:
NYC, 1987) are our main texts, though there will be many other references and handouts. The
handouts in class will be covered on the exams. The reading load is not excessive in number of
pages, but some of the reading may be difficult. The emphasis throughout is on clarifying issues,
description, and evaluation of arguments--and we will work on method early on. The main work
to be done for the course is not in mastering and regurgitating the material, though you have to
read it; the main work is instead being active in response--questioning, applying, arguing, getting
excited, worrying. In a word, thinking.
Grading: Students will write a fair amount. I expect about twenty to thirty pages from each
student over the semester. There will be exercises in class. You'll write a letter to the class
almost every week (via e-mail if you can) which will amount to an intellectual journal of your
thinking, and keep a copy of everything so you can hand it to me to review at intervals over the
term. The letters may summarize investigations students make into problems about disciplinary
boundaries and what is common to academic disciplines, or they may continue discussions from
class. I'll provide topics for those who need them. Each student will also either do a presentation
to the class or write a longer paper to distribute to the class. Suggestions for topics for these
projects will be presented in class, but students can dream up something else as long as it will
show a high level of insight, hard work, relevance to our issues, and worry. Students who do not
turn in these projects by the deadline (see below) must take a final exam, over questions I'll
distribute at least a week ahead. Grades will be straight averages of the grades you receive,
unless you get better over the term, in which case the last two will be averaged for your term
grade.
Schedule: After some orientation, we will spend three weeks working through essays from the Klemke volume (roughly in the order they have in the book) in Part 1 and Part 2, and then will mix assignments from Part 5 and Part 6 in Klemke with readings in Rosenberg and in Sheppard. Our work in the last third of the course will be according to a schedule we put together as a class, depending on our interests. Tentatively, note the following deadlines and due dates:
30 Jan First letter to class due. 6 Feb, 13 Feb, 20 Feb, letters due. 27 Feb, hand in packet.
6 Mar, 13 Mar, 27 Mar, letters due. 3 April, hand in packet.
10 Apr, 17 Apr, 24 Apr, letters due. 1 May, hand in packet. 8 May, deadline for papers and presentations.
11-15 May, Final exams D:\office\wpwin\wpdocs\courses\309bsyl.s98