Questions for Philosophy of science class (5 pages)

Choose one question from Part I and one from Part II for a total of two questions. Write on questions in any order you like but indicate your choices clearly. Write in complete sentences, not an outline. In answering the questions, make sure you construct TWO coherent and unified essays. When you employ a technical term or concept, be sure to explain what it means. Part I: Choose either #1 or #2, but not both (1) Explain the three key tenets of Bayesianism. Show, by example, what the difference is between the “posterior probability” and the “likelihood” of some hypothesis. What is a “prior probability”, and how might objective values for prior probabilities be defended? What is the “Bayesian Theory of Confirmation”? Show why, according to Bayesianism, novel predictions tend to confirm a hypothesis. (2) Explain what the problem of induction is. What is Hume’s main argument against the rationality of inductive reasoning? How does Popper propose to solve the problem of induction? What are some objections to Popper’s solution? Why does the problem of induction not apply to Bayesianism? What challenge, according to Okasha, remains for the Bayesian solution? How might this challenge be met? Part II: Choose either #3 or #4, but not both. (3) State and explain the key features of the Deductive-Nomological (DN) model of explanation. Give an example that conforms to the DN model. Explain, by example, the problem of symmetry. Explain, by example, the problem of irrelevance. What is the causal model of explanation? How does the causal model avoid the problems that the DN model faces? Describe an instance of a non-causal explanation. (4) Explain the distinction between scientific realism and the various versions of anti-realism. Why, according to anti-realists, are electrons “unobservable”? State and explain the standard argument for scientific realism. What is the argument from underdetermination? How might the realist object to the argument? What is the argument from idealized models? How might the realist object to the argument?