Course overview
- Study period
- Semester 2, 2024 (22/07/2024 - 18/11/2024)
- Study level
- Undergraduate
- Location
- St Lucia
- Attendance mode
- In Person
- Units
- 2
- Administrative campus
- St Lucia
- Coordinating unit
- Historical & Philosophical Inq
Modern science emerged in the seventeenth century, deepening our understanding of our place in the world by means of theories that offered comprehensive explanations of how nature works. But what exactly is 'science'? From where does science gain its authority? And why should we trust science at all? This is a course for scientifically minded philosophers and philosophically minded scientists (and everyone in between!) that explores topics such as the methodology, and historical development, of contemporary scientific practice, scientific values and biases, and the interface between science and society.
While we will investigate these topics with the aid of examples and case studies taken from sciences such as astronomy, physics, biology, climate science, and psychology, no background knowledge will be assumed in any of these fields.
This course contains assessment that reflects work integrated learning.
Course requirements
Assumed background
No background knowledge is required. Knowledge of introductory logic is recommended, but not mandatory.ﾠ
Recommended prerequisites
We recommend completing the following courses before enrolling in this one:
PHIL1002 or SCIE1000
Course contact
Course staff
Lecturer
Timetable
The timetable for this course is available on the UQ Public Timetable.
Aims and outcomes
Science is often referred to, and relied upon, as the most successful and trustworthy source of knowledge we haveﾠat our disposal. Nevertheless, scientific inquiry is not free from philosophical assumptions, nor is it immune from the socio-historicalﾠconstraints that inevitably shape and guideﾠany collective enterprise. The aim of this course is to expose these assumptions, and to foster a critical and informed understanding of what science is, what it can do, what it aims to do, and why we should trust it.
Learning outcomes
After successfully completing this course you should be able to:
LO1.
Compare different philosophical views on the scope, role, and objectives of science.
LO2.
Recognise logical, epistemological, methodological, and metaphysical aspects of science that underlie contemporary scientific practice.
LO3.
Recognise the social, historical, cultural, and institutional biases and constraints behind scientific practice.
LO4.
Engage in contemporary debates about science in a critical and informed way.
Assessment
Assessment summary
| Category | Assessment task | Weight | Due date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Participation/ Student contribution, Tutorial/ Problem Set | Class participation | 30% | |
| Essay/ Critique | Essay | 30% 1500 words |
13/09/2024 2:00 pm |
| Paper/ Report/ Annotation |
News article analysis
|
40% 1800 words |
25/10/2024 2:00 pm |
Assessment details
Class participation
- Mode
- Oral, Written
- Category
- Participation/ Student contribution, Tutorial/ Problem Set
- Weight
- 30%
- Learning outcomes
- L01, L02, L03, L04
Task description
Students are assessed on their participation and contribution to class discussions and engagement with problem tasks in up to 10 weeks.
Submission guidelines
Written responses to problem tasks to be handed in each week in class.
Deferral or extension
You cannot defer or apply for an extension for this assessment.
Students who have a legitimate reason for not making it along to class can negotiate alternative arrangements with the course coordinator.
Essay
- Mode
- Written
- Category
- Essay/ Critique
- Weight
- 30% 1500 words
- Due date
13/09/2024 2:00 pm
- Learning outcomes
- L01, L02, L03, L04
Task description
Essay on a topic from the first half of the course.
This assessment task evaluates students' abilities, skills and knowledge without the aid of generative Artificial Intelligence (AI). Students are advised that the use of AI technologies to develop responses is strictly prohibited and may constitute student misconduct under the Student Code of Conduct.
Submission guidelines
Essay to be submitted via Turnitin.
Deferral or extension
You may be able to apply for an extension.
The maximum extension allowed is 28 days. Extensions are given in multiples of 24 hours.
Late submission
A penalty of 10% of the maximum possible mark will be deducted per 24 hours from time submission is due for up to 7 days. After 7 days, you will receive a mark of 0.
News article analysis
- Mode
- Written
- Category
- Paper/ Report/ Annotation
- Weight
- 40% 1800 words
- Due date
25/10/2024 2:00 pm
- Other conditions
- Work integrated learning.
- Learning outcomes
- L01, L02, L03, L04
Task description
Critical engagement with a recent news article (last 3 years) concerning a topic related to the course content. Examples include: news articles concerning scientific discoveries or claims, debates surrounding science or some scientific pronouncements, or contemporary discussions regarding scientific institutions or practice. The goal of the review is (i) to demonatrate your knowledge of the content of the course, and (ii) to apply the conceptual and analytical tools developed in the course, in order to cast light on the philosophical presuppositions concerning the nature of science underlying the statements or debates referred to in the news article.
This assessment task evaluates students' abilities, skills and knowledge without the aid of generative Artificial Intelligence (AI). Students are advised that the use of AI technologies to develop responses is strictly prohibited and may constitute student misconduct under the Student Code of Conduct.
Submission guidelines
New article analysis to be submitted via Turnitin.
Deferral or extension
You may be able to apply for an extension.
The maximum extension allowed is 28 days. Extensions are given in multiples of 24 hours.
Late submission
A penalty of 10% of the maximum possible mark will be deducted per 24 hours from time submission is due for up to 7 days. After 7 days, you will receive a mark of 0.
Course grading
Full criteria for each grade is available in the Assessment Procedure.
| Grade | Cut off Percent | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 1 (Low Fail) | 0 - 24 |
Absence of evidence of achievement of course learning outcomes. Course grade description: Grade 1, Low Fail, is generally awarded in cases where some assessment has been submitted, but it is of wholly unsatisfactory standard or quantity. In work submitted, however, there is no demonstrated evidence of understanding of the concepts of the field of study or basic requirements of the course. |
| 2 (Fail) | 25 - 44 |
Minimal evidence of achievement of course learning outcomes. Course grade description: Grade 2, Fail, is generally awarded to work that exhibits deficiencies in understanding and applying the fundamental concepts of the course and field of study, and as such, does not satisfy the basic requirements of the course. Often, one or more major items of assessment will not have been completed. |
| 3 (Marginal Fail) | 45 - 49 |
Demonstrated evidence of developing achievement of course learning outcomes Course grade description: Grade 3, Marginal Fail, is generally awarded if a student has submitted work that attempts to meet the knowledge and skill requirements of the course, but is only able to demonstrate a superficial understanding of the fundamental concepts of the course. Students will usually have attempted all major pieces of assessment and show that they have an identifiable, emerging ability to apply basic knowledge and skills. |
| 4 (Pass) | 50 - 64 |
Demonstrated evidence of functional achievement of course learning outcomes. Course grade description: Grade 4, Pass, is generally awarded where all major items of assessment have been submitted. An adequate knowledge of the fundamental concepts of the course and field of study should be demonstrated and a functional skill level achieved. |
| 5 (Credit) | 65 - 74 |
Demonstrated evidence of proficient achievement of course learning outcomes. Course grade description: Grade 5, Credit, is generally awarded where all items of assessment have been completed and a substantial understanding of the fundamental concepts of the course and field of study have been demonstrated. |
| 6 (Distinction) | 75 - 84 |
Demonstrated evidence of advanced achievement of course learning outcomes. Course grade description: Grade 6, Distinction, is generally awarded where all items of assessment have been completed and substantial knowledge of the deeper and more complex aspects of the course and field of study have been demonstrated. |
| 7 (High Distinction) | 85 - 100 |
Demonstrated evidence of exceptional achievement of course learning outcomes. Course grade description: Grade 7, High Distinction, is generally awarded where all items of assessment have been completed and there is evidence that the deeper and more complex aspects of the course and field of study have been mastered. |
Additional course grading information
A word count that is within ±10% of the set length (word limit) is acceptable. Word count does not include footnotes; however, discursive footnotes are included in the word count. A word count that is outside these 10% will receive a proportionate penalty and will be graded against the grading criteria.
Your tutorial participation will be assessed according to the following criteria:
- Evidence of participation in discussions.
- Evidence of preparation for the tutorial, most notably through completing the set readings.
- Quality of contributions to discussions.
- Fostering of group discussions, through courteous and respectful interactions with staff and students.
- Attendance is necessary to fulfill the above criteria, as per the course requirements, but marks cannot be awarded for attendance alone.
To achieve a grade of 7 (High Distinction, 85-100%), your attendance will be flawless and your participation exceptional. This grade reflects exceptional levels of preparation, mastery of course materials, and very high quality contributions to, and fostering of, group discussions. You should be able to engage with your peers very effectively.
To achieve a grade of 6 (Distinction, 75-84) your attendance will be excellent and your participation very substantial. This grade reflects excellent levels of preparation, knowledge of course materials, and high quality contributions to, and fostering of, group discussions. You should be able to engage with your peers effectively.
To achieve a grade of 5 (Credit, 65 – 74%), your attendance and participation will be good. This grade reflects proficient levels of preparation, good knowledge of course materials, and good quality contributions to, and fostering of, group discussions.
To achieve a grade of 4 (Pass, 50 – 64%) your attendance and participation will be satisfactory. This grade reflects adequate levels of preparation and knowledge of course materials, and an acceptable quality of contributions to, and fostering of, group discussions.
To achieve a grade of 3 (Marginal Fail, 45 – 49%) your attendance and participation will be unsatisfactory. This grade reflects irregular attendance and/or participation and superficial knowledge of course materials and basic levels of preparation. However, when in attendance, there is evidence of your ability to demonstrate developing achievement in contributions to, and fostering of, group discussions.
To achieve a grade of 2 (Fail, 25-44%), your attendance and participation will be very unsatisfactory. This grade reflects irregular attendance and/or participation, minimal knowledge of course materials, little evidence of preparation, and mixed to low quality of contributions to, and fostering of, group discussions.
To achieve a grade of 1 (Low Fail, 0-24%), your attendance and participation will be unsatisfactory. This grade reflects irregular attendance and/or participation, an no evidence of preparation, and little or no evidence of quality of contributions to, and fostering of, group discussions.
Your essay will be assessed according to the following criteria:
- Ability to define the topic or philosophical issue under debate. (Topic definition)
- Ability to construct a well-reasoned argument for a certain point of view. (Argument and Structure)
- Depth and breadth of understanding of the various positions in a philosophical debate. (Scope and Depth of Treatment)
- Insight and/or originality in interpreting texts or constructing a point of view or argument. (Originality)
- Capacity to produce a polished, well-written and appropriately referenced essay. (Presentation)
To achieve a grade of 7 (High Distinction, 85-100%), your essay should reflect an exceptional level of achievement. It should demonstrate that you have undertaken extensive, high-level research, that you are able to form a very rigorous, well-organised argument, and that your discussion is original and creative. It should also demonstrate that you are able to evaluate and organise data and/or evidence in a critical manner and that you have a sophisticated and insightful understanding of problems and issues. Your essay will be very well written, clear and concise, pay strict attention to discipline conventions and have minimal, if any errors in referencing, expression, grammar, spelling and punctuation.
To achieve a grade of 6 (Distinction, 75-84%), your essay should reflect an advanced level of achievement. It should demonstrate that you have undertaken wide research, that you are able to form a rigorous, well-organised argument, and that your discussion is coherent and convincing. It should also demonstrate that you are able to evaluate data and/or evidence in a perceptive manner, and that your understanding of problems and issues is perceptive and insightful. Your essay will be well written, clear and concise, follow discipline conventions and have few errors in referencing, expression, grammar, spelling and punctuation.
To achieve a grade of 5 (Credit, 65 – 74%) your essay should reflect a proficient level of achievement. It should demonstrate that you have undertaken the expected level of research, that you are able to develop or adapt convincing arguments and justify them adequately, that you are able to evaluate data and/or evidence in a proficient manner, and that you have a good understanding of problems and issues. The presentation and referencing of your essay will largely follow discipline conventions, perhaps have some errors in grammar, spelling and punctuation, and demonstrate your ability to communicate effectively.
To achieve a grade of 4 (Pass, 50 – 64%) your essay should reflect functional achievement. It should demonstrate that you are able to apply fundamental concepts and skills, that you have undertaken a basic level of research and have the basic ability to evaluate data and/or evidence, to identify problems and issues, to offer insights and to develop routine arguments. Your organisation, writing, referencing, spelling and grammar will be adequate and use some of the discipline conventions to communicate appropriately.
To achieve a grade of 3 (Marginal Fail, 45 – 49%), your essay should reflect developing levels of achievement. It should demonstrate that you have a superficial knowledge of fundamental concepts and skills, that you have undertaken a basic level of research, made some attempt to evaluate data and/or evidence, to identify problems and issues, and to offer insights. Your arguments, while underdeveloped, show your emerging ability to apply knowledge and skills. Your organisation, writing, spelling and grammar will be adequate, perhaps poor, and your referencing and use of discipline conventions poor/and or inconsistent.
To achieve a grade of 2 (Fail, 25-44%) your essay will reflect deficiencies in skill acquisition and in your understanding of the fundamental concepts of the course. It will demonstrate that you have not undertaken adequate research, that you are unable to evaluate data and/or evidence, to identify problems and issues, or to offer insights adequately. Your arguments will be unsupported and/or inappropriate, your organisation and writing will be poor and/or inappropriate, and referencing and use of discipline conventions poor/and or inconsistent.
To achieve a grade of 1 (Low Fail, 0-24%), your essay will reflect minimal evidence of achievement, and exhibit deficiencies in skill acquisition and in your understanding of the fundamental concepts of the course. It will demonstrate that you have not undertaken adequate research, that you are unable to evaluate data and/or evidence, to identify problems and issues, and/or to offer insights adequately. Your arguments will be unsupported and/or inappropriate, your organisation and writing will be poor and/or inappropriate, and referencing and use of discipline conventions poor/and or inconsistent.
Your critical review and response will be assessed according to the following criteria:
- Evidence of comprehension of the reading or readings under review.
- Critique of the reading or readings.
- Demonstrated ability to apply themes from the course in response to the reading or readings.
- Insight and creativity.
- Clear and concise written expression, well presented.
To achieve a grade of 7 (High Distinction, 85-100%), your critical review of and response to the readings should demonstrate exceptional comprehension of the works under review; it should be highly persuasive and clear in its critique; it should provide a sophisticated application of the themes from the course to the readings; and should demonstrate exceptional levels of insight and creativity. Your writing will be very clear and concise, pay strict attention to discipline conventions and have minimal, if any errors in referencing, expression, grammar, spelling and punctuation.
To achieve a grade of 6 (Distinction, 75-84%), your critical review of and reflection on readings should demonstrate an advanced comprehension of the works under review; it should be very persuasive and clear in its critique; it should provide a perceptive application of the themes from the course to the readings; and should demonstrate advanced levels of insight and creativity. Your writing will be clear and concise, pay strict attention to discipline conventions and have minimal, if any errors in referencing, expression, grammar, spelling and punctuation.
To achieve a grade of 5 (Credit, 65 – 74%), your critical review of and reflection on readings should demonstrate a proficient comprehension of the works under review; it should be effective and clear in its critique; it should provide a proficient application of the themes from the course to the readings; and should demonstrate proficient levels of insight and creativity. The presentation and referencing of your review will follow/largely follow discipline conventions, have few/some errors in grammar, spelling and punctuation, and demonstrate your ability to communicate effectively.
To achieve a grade of 4 (Pass, 50 – 64%), your critical review of and reflection on readings should demonstrate a functional comprehension of the works under review; it should offer a coherent critique; it should provide a functional application of the themes from the course to the readings; and should demonstrate basic levels of insight and creativity. Your organisation, writing, referencing, spelling and grammar will be adequate and use some of the discipline conventions to communicate appropriately.
To achieve a grade of 3 (Marginal Fail, 45 – 49%), your critical review of and reflection on readings should demonstrate developing levels of achievement and a very basic level of research, but it falls short of meeting all the requirements for a passing grade. It should attempt to demonstrate a basic comprehension of the works under review; attempt to offer a coherent critique; provide a superficial application of the themes from the course to the readings; and generate only superficial insights. Your organisation, writing, spelling and grammar will be adequate/poor and your referencing and use of discipline conventions poor/and or inconsistent.
To achieve a grade of 2 (Fail, 25-44%), your critical review of and reflection on the readings will reflect inadequate comprehension of the works under review; an inability to offer a coherent critique; an inadequate application of the themes from the course; and an inability to identify insights. Your organisation and writing will be poor and/or inappropriate, and referencing and use of discipline conventions poor/and or inconsistent.
To achieve a grade of 1 (Low Fail, 0-24%), your critical review of and reflection on readings will not show evidence of understanding and comprehension of the works under review. It will fail to demonstrate a satisfactory understanding of the work, it will not provide a coherent critique, it will fail to apply the themes from the course, and provide no insight or creativity. Your organisation and writing will be poor and/or inappropriate, and referencing and use of discipline conventions poor/and or inconsistent.
Supplementary assessment
Supplementary assessment is available for this course.
Additional assessment information
- Failure to submit all major assessment items (those worth 15% and above) will result in a maximum grade of 2 (Fail).
- By submitting work through Turnitin you are deemed to have accepted the following declaration: 'I certify that this assignment is my own work and has not been submitted, either previously or concurrently, in wholeﾠﾠ or in part, to this University or any other educational institution, for marking or assessment’
- All studentsﾠmustﾠensure they receive their Turnitin receipt on every submission of assessments items. YOU MUST CHECK THAT THE RECEIPT CONFIRMS THAT SUBMISSION HAS BEEN SUCCESSFUL.
- A valid Turnitin receipt will be the only evidence accepted if assessments are missing. Without evidence, the assessment will receive the standard late penalty, or after ten calendar days, will receive zero. In the case of a Blackboard outage, please contact the Course Coordinator as soon as possible to confirm the outage with ITS.
- It is the responsibility of the student to ensure that they are submitting assessment items on a device that is capable of the task, and that appropriate internet bandwidth and speed is available. If you cannot be sure that your device or internet will enable you to complete or submit an assessment task, you must come onto campus and use one of the University Computers in the Library or Computer Labs.
- Plagiarism, and asking or paying someone else to do your work, is cheating and constitutes ﾠacademic misconduct.ﾠ
- Feedback against the assessment criteria in the form of comments on your script will be provided through Turnitin or on your script directly.
- For information on assessment re-mark seeﾠhttps://my.uq.edu.au/information-and-services/manage-my-program/academic-progress-and-final-results/querying-result
Learning resources
You'll need the following resources to successfully complete the course. We've indicated below if you need a personal copy of the reading materials or your own item.
Library resources
Find the required and recommended resources for this course on the UQ Library website.
Additional learning resources information
All required, suggested, and further readings will be available on Blackboard.
For the Philosophy Subject Guide, please see https://guides.library.uq.edu.au/philosophy.
Learning activities
The learning activities for this course are outlined below. Learn more about the learning outcomes that apply to this course.
Filter activity type by
Please select
| Learning period | Activity type | Topic |
|---|---|---|
Week 1 |
Lecture |
Introduction: what is science? General introduction to the course and to the subject matter. Includes practical information about learning resources, assessments, and learning activities. Learning outcomes: L01, L02 |
Week 2 |
Lecture |
Experiment and induction: from Aristotle to Bacon An overview of the Aristotelian worldview, the beginning of the scientific revolution, and Bacon's 'new method' of induction. Learning outcomes: L01, L02 |
Week 3 |
Lecture |
Nature in the language of mathematics The scientific revolution, the role of Kepler and Galileo, and the use of mathematics in science. Learning outcomes: L01, L02 |
Week 4 |
Lecture |
Positivism: from Paris to Vienna Introduction to positivism through the evolution of 19th century philosophy of science. Overview of the major tenets of logical positivism and its influence on contemporary philosophy of science. Learning outcomes: L01, L02 |
Week 5 |
Lecture |
Confirmation and falsification Outline of the logical positivists' theory of confirmation, and Popper's response -- falsification. Learning outcomes: L01, L02 |
Week 6 |
Lecture |
Scientific paradigms and the cycle of revolutions Outline of Kuhn's picture of science -- paradigms, normal science, and revolutions. Learning outcomes: L01, L02, L03, L04 |
Week 7 |
Lecture |
The sociological picture of science Introduction to the social, cultural, and institutional constraints on scientific inquiry. Outline of Longino's picture of science Learning outcomes: L01, L02, L03, L04 |
Week 8 |
Lecture |
Feminist philosophy of science Overview of the principal feminist approaches to science and examination of the gender and perspectival biases in scientific practices. Learning outcomes: L01, L02, L03, L04 |
Week 9 |
Lecture |
Realism and antirealism Philosophical views on the metaphysical implications of scientific descriptions: the theoretical/observational dichotomy, and the ontological status of unobservable entities. Learning outcomes: L01, L02, L03, L04 |
Week 10 |
Lecture |
What do different sciences look like? Comparison and review of the practice of four different sciences: astrophysics, evolutionary biology, psychology, climate science. Learning outcomes: L01, L03, L04 |
Week 11 |
Lecture |
Contemporary issues with scientific practice Review of a range of contemporary problems that modern science faces: 'publish or perish' and the replication crisis; values and bias; dealing with uncertainty. Learning outcomes: L01, L03, L04 |
Week 12 |
Lecture |
Trust in science Should we trust science? A case study of climate science, trust, and the interface between science and politics. Learning outcomes: L01, L03, L04 |
Week 13 |
Lecture |
Should scientists save the world? A brief exploration of the COVID-19 pandemic and the development of the vaccine, and the role that scientists do and should play in the development of public policy and public scientific literacy. Learning outcomes: L01, L03, L04 |
Policies and procedures
University policies and procedures apply to all aspects of student life. As a UQ student, you must comply with University-wide and program-specific requirements, including the:
- Student Code of Conduct Policy
- Student Integrity and Misconduct Policy and Procedure
- Assessment Procedure
- Examinations Procedure
- Reasonable Adjustments - Students Policy and Procedure
Learn more about UQ policies on my.UQ and the Policy and Procedure Library.