This week we will again debate a controversial issue together in class. Our question is this: Is scientific realism an adequate way to think about science or does some form of antirealism make more sense? In other words, does science help us get in touch with the truth about reality or does science have some other function? We have read at least two overviews of this controversy, and now it is our turn to weigh the reasoning on each side. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the realist position? What are the strengths and weaknesses of the antirealist position? Which side seems best, all things considered?
BrainStuff – HowStuffWorks. (2015, June 16). Did the brontosaurus exist? (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qSRL33NoNTA) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qSRL33NoNTA
This 4-minute video by Jonathan Strickland gives an example of how unobserved entities studied by science can be constructed in multiple ways. We talk about something called a brontosaurus that we essentially made up. Moreover, the story of how that dinosaur was made up illustrates some of the nonscientific factors such as financial incentives, personal rivalries, and pop culture that can influence scientific research. This video will assist you in your Week 2 Discussion.
Closer To Truth. (2016, April 1). Bas van Fraassen What are the scope and limits of science? (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brAOVfAoimQ) Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brAOVfAoimQ
This 11-minute video of philosopher Bas van Fraassen provides additional information about scientific antirealism that will assist you in your Week 2 Discussion. The closed captioning and transcript for this video are accurate for those who need them.
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|