Philosophy of Science
SECTION A
1 What should the philosopher of science learn from the scientist?
2 Does the history of science show the philosophy of science to be a waste of time?
SECTION B
3 Solve the problem of induction.
4 Should we adopt a counterfactual account of causation?
5 Can epistemic scepticism be refuted?
6 Does the scientific understanding of forms of knowledge require relativism?
7 “One proposition confirms another if and only if it makes it more probable”.
Discuss.
8 How do scientists answer “why” questions?
9 Either (a) Is the acceptance and rejection of scientific theories a matter of mob
psychology? Discuss with reference to Popper and Kuhn.
Or (b) Does Kuhn refute Popper?
10 Should we believe our successful scientific theories to be true, or would a more
cautious attitude be appropriate?
11 What problems do functional laws pose for a simple regularity account of laws of
nature?
12 Either (a) The panda’s thumb would never have been created by an intelligent
designer. Therefore, the intelligent design hypothesis should be rejected.
Evaluate this argument.
Or (b) Evolutionary theory explains why we have the moral beliefs we do.
Therefore, our moral beliefs are probably false. Discuss.
13. On what basis should decisions be made about the funding of scientific research?