Instructor: James Woodbridge
email address: jw79@nyu.edu
Office Hours: M 5pm-6pm, Th 10am-11am
Office: Main Building 503-O
Office Phone: 998-8330
Dept. Phone: 998-8320

SECOND PAPER ASSIGNMENT

Write a 4-6 page paper completing the tasks assigned in the topic below.

Your paper is due in my office or mailbox no later than 3pm on Monday, June 25th.

Topic:

According to Boyd, Kuhn's opposition to scientific realism (SR) is based on an epistemological critique of a traditional view about scientific methodology, a critique centered on a rejection of traditional assumptions about observation. What does Kuhn say about observation, and what does this lead him to think about scientific methodology? Boyd characterizes SR in terms of 4 theses. What aspect of SR so understood does Kuhn's ciritique lead him to reject? Explain the reasoning behind this conclusion. Boyd claims that even accepting Kuhn's epistemological critique, the anti-realist conclusion he draws is not the only one possible. In fact, Boyd offers a version of SR that incorporates Kuhn's views about observation and scientific methodology. What is Boyd's realist picture of scientific methodology? (See p. 59.) Be sure to indicate how the central assumption made in this picture (see the bottom third of p. 64) factors into the account. What is Boyd's argument for his alternative conclusion? What sort of reasoning does he employ? What phenomenon does he focus on in his argument? Do you think his argument is legitimate? (You might consider Fine's objections.) If we accept Kuhn's views on observation and methodology, which kind of conclusion should we draw, anti-realist or realist? Explain why you picked the option you did.