PHIL UN3551

I learned how to better communicate my ideas as clearly as possible and adjust my perspective on concepts I had often taken as a given.

To start asking important questions in western philosophy of science

We had a couple questions to fill out during lecture but we would discuss the answers, so it's more of a participation grade. The midterm was basically a simplified version of these questions. Each lecture was well organized, so we knew what the main questions would be. Her grading was fair. Not harsh but I don't think you'll get an A no matter what. But if you pay attention in class you'll get an A.

Philosophy of Science: 4 homeworks, one 12pg take-home exam

Philosophy of science, issues surrounding confirmation and induction, cognitive status of scientific theory.

In general, the course taught me to evaluate a critique the scientific process from a philosophical perspective. We learned both reasons not to exalt science to the realm of epistemic purity and reasons why, despite this, the scientific process is still a unique and powerful epistemological tool whose value to humanity can't be overstated. Additionally, I was given the opportunity to read a text —Structures by Kuhn— that I've wanted to read for years but never made time for; I was also introduced to a text —Scientific Image by van Fraassen— that I never would've looked at, but was incredibly interesting and one that I hope to complete in the near future!

The course was Philosophy of Science. As a stemlord with passing interest in philosophy I wasn't expecting to learn much, but I was very wrong. I cannot look at the world the same way again. Lisa brought the readings to life, and explained philosophers better than any other philosophy professor. She had more knowledge of the literature than others, but she also was an expert at simplifying and answering basic questions. Her teaching style was great. I was worried initially that she said she wasn't going to publish her slides on Canvas (it's a lot of great information and you're limited primarily by how fast you can type), but a few weeks in she changed her mind and published all the lectures. Philosophy of Science is great, some of the best contemporary philosophy out there and Lisa has proven herself the GOAT.

First off, Helzner is a really nice professor. I thought of him more as a dude. Very approachable, jokes with his students, but very conscious of bullshit. Go to his office hours for homework help and he will help you more than is due. But he expects you to try very hard. Rational Choice and Philosophy of Science tackle pretty technical subjects in philosophy. You won't ever have had anything like it. The readings are dense, and his lectures will work off of them. If you intend to cram for homeworks or exams, you will have a grueling (but not impossible) time. The thing to note about Rational Choice and Philosophy of Science is that while they are philosophy courses, learning the material is like learning in a science or math field - the material builds up sequentially, and it takes time to sink in. Don't expect to strap down last-minute with a few essays for the final paper and expect to come up with brilliance. Grading: Helzner himself said that an A should be an earned grade, should feel special to a student. He gives very few A's. He says he gives out a lot of B's.

I learned a great deal about how to approach philosophical thought and discussion and how to express my ideas effectively. I also learned a tremendous amount about important topics in scientific philosophy.

Introduction to philosophy of science, works of two major philosophers of science