Emne DSP100_3, ENGELSK, 2014 HØST, versjon 31-May-2015 23:45:01 PhD Course in Philosophy of Science and Ethics Course Code: DSP100_3, Credits: 10 credits Offered by: Faculty of Arts and Education, Department of Education and Sports Science Semester tuition start & duration: Spring, 1 semester Language of instruction: English Course staff - John Roscoe (Course teacher) - Ståle Gundersen (Course teacher) Learning outcome Knowledge The student will gain knowledge of: * The philosophical foundations for different theoretical research approaches in the social sciences and the humanities. * The ongoing debates in research ethics related to the social sciences and the humanities. Skills By the end of the course, the student will be able to: * Use conceptual and theoretical tools in her/his own argumentation. * Facilitate critical reflection and argumentation upon presuppositions that may easily be taken for granted in their own research tradition, or in science as a whole. * Critically analyse ethical issues within the fields of social sciences and humanities General competence By the end of the course, the student will be able to: * Demonstrate competence in analytical discussion and well-structured academic argumentation. * Relate discipline-specific topics to the foundational debate within the disciplines. * Address discipline-specific topics to general reflections and concepts (like the ones discussed in the seminars) of philosophy of science and research ethics. Content The course will give a broad orientation on central issues in the philosophy of science and research ethics particularly related to the social sciences and the humanities. The course will focus on the following topics: page 1
DSP100_3 - PhD Course in Philosophy of Science and Ethics * The philosophical foundations for the interpretative tradition * The philosophical foundations for the naturalistic tradition * The relation between naturalism and interpretationalism in the human sciences * Models of explanation * Constructivism in the human sciences * Holism versus methodological individualism * Research ethics Teaching methods The course will be held as lectures and seminars with discussions. There will be 10 seminars: 6 seminars in philosophy of science and 4 seminars in ethics. A detailed timetable will be sent to the course participants at the beginning of the semester. Required prerequisite knowledge None Exam One approved essay and an oral examination Wt. Duration Marks Aid 1/1 Pass - Fail Evaluation will be based on one individual paper (6000 words (+/- 10%)) and a final oral examination (approximately 30 minutes). The candidate will have the option to write the paper in one of two different fields: Philosophy of Science or Research Ethics. The oral examination will cover the field not chosen for the paper. The paper must be written in English or in a Scandinavian language. The paper must be handed in within 6 weeks after the final seminar. In the case of a rejected paper, the candidate will have two more weeks to improve the paper. The student must pass the paper and the final oral examination in order to pass the course as a whole. Coursework requirements * Active participation in lectures and seminars. page 2
Emne DSP100_3, ENGELSK, 2014 HØST, versjon 31-May-2015 23:45:01 Open to PhD candidates enrolled in PhD programmes at the University of Stavanger (Faculty of Arts and Education and Faculty of Social Sciences) and at cooperating research institutions may participate in the course. Course assessment The course participants are encouraged to contribute to the course evaluation. An evaluation form will be made available to the candidates after the papers are handed in. Literature (The following list might be subject to minor changes) Philosophy of Science Textbook Rosenberg, A. (2012) Philosophy of Social Science (fourth edition). Colorado: Westview Press. Articles Elster, J. (1989) Mechanism, in Nuts and Bolts for the Social Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Fay, B. and Moon, J.D. (1998) What would an adequate philosophy of social science look like? In E.D. Klemke, R. Hollinger and D.W. Rudge (eds.) Introductory Readings in the Philosophy of Science (3. ed). Amherst, N.Y.: Prometheus Books. Føllesdal, D. (1994) Hermeneutics and the Hypotetico-Deductive Method, in M. Martin & L.C. McIntyre (eds.) Readings in the Philosophy of Social Science. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Godfrey-Smith, P. (2003) Explanation, in Theory and Reality: An introduction to the philosophy of science. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Hacking, Ian (2003) What is Social Construction? The Teenage Pregnancy Example? In G. Delanty & P. Strydom (eds.) Philosophies of Social Science: The classics and contemporary readings. Philadelphia: Open University Press. Jones, T. (2004) Uncovering Cultural Meaning: Problems and Solutions, Behavior and Philosophy 32: 247-268. (http://www.behavior.org/resources/140.pdf ) page 3
DSP100_3 - PhD Course in Philosophy of Science and Ethics Kelle, U. (2001) Sociological explanations between micro and macro and the integration of qualitative and quantitative methods, Forum qualitative social research 2(1). Kuhn, T. (1998) The Natural and the Human Sciences, in E.D. Klemke, R. Hollinger and D.W. Rudge (eds.) Introductory Readings in the Philosophy of Science (3. ed). Amherst, N.Y.: Prometheus Books. Machlup, F. (1998) Are the social sciences really inferior? In E.D. Klemke, R. Hollinger and D.W. Rudge (eds.) Introductory Readings in the Philosophy of Science (3. ed). Amherst, N.Y.: Prometheus Books. Taylor, C. (1998) Interpretation and the Sciences of Man (Abridged from the original), in E.D. Klemke, R. Hollinger and D.W. Rudge (eds.) Introductory Readings in the Philosophy of Science (3. ed). Amherst, N.Y.: Prometheus Books. Ylikoski, P. (2012) Micro, Macro, and Mechanisms, in H. Kincaid (ed.) The Oxford Handbook of the Philosophy of Social Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Research Ethics General overview Guidelines for Research Ethics in The Social Sciences, Law and the Humanities (NESH). https://www.etikkom.no/forskningsetikk/etiske-retningslinjer/samfunnsvitenskap-jus-oghumaniora/ Articles Allmark, P. et al (2009). Ethical issues in the use of in-depth interviews: literature review and discussion. Research Ethics Review, Vol. 5, No 2, 48-54. Alver, B.G. & Øyen, Ø. (2007). Challenges of Research Ethics: An Introduction. In Bente Gullveig Alver, Tove Ingebjørg Fjell og Ørjar Øyen (eds.), Research Ethics in Studies of Culture and Social Life. Helsingfors: Academia Scientiarum Fennica, pp. 11:55. Edwards, R. and Mauthner, M. (2003). Ethics and feminist research: Theory and Practice. In page 4
Emne DSP100_3, ENGELSK, 2014 HØST, versjon 31-May-2015 23:45:01 Mauthner, Melanie, Birch, Maxine, Jessop, Julie and Tina Miller (ed). Ethics in qualitative research. London: Sage. Fanelli D. (2009). How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey Data. PLoS ONE 2009;4(5): e5738. Farrell,A. (ed). (2005).Ethical research with children. Maidenhead: Open University Press. (An extract) Guillemin, M. and Gilliam, L. (2004). Ethics, Reflexivity, and ''Ethically Important Moments'' in Research. Qualitative Inquiry 10:261. 261-279. Helgeland, Ingeborg Marie (2005). "Catch 22"- Ethical Dilemmas in Interviewing Marginalized Groups. Qualitative Inquiry, 11/4. Pp. 549-569. Hofmann, B. (2007). That's not science! The role of moral philosophy in the science/nonscience divide. Theor Med Bioeth. 2007;28(3):243-56. Hofmann, B., Myhr A.I. & Holm, S. (2013). Scientific dishonesty a nationwide survey of doctoral students in Norway. BMC Medical Ethics 2013, 14:3. Kalleberg, R. (2007). A Reconstruction of The Ethos of Science. Journal of Classical Sociology. Vol. 7, nr 2, s. 137-160. Liamputtong, P. (2009). Researching the vulnerable. A guide to sensitive research methods. London: Sage. (An extract). Pittenger, D.J. (2003): Internet Research: An Opportunity to Revisit Classic Ethical Problems in Behavioral Research. Ethics & Behavior, 13:1, 45-60. Rohdes, R. (2005). Rethinking Research Ethics. The American Journal of Bioethics, 5 (1) 7-28. Steneck, N. (2006). Fostering Integrity in Research: Definitions, Current Knowledge, and Future Directions. Science and Engineering Ethics, vol. 12, nr. 1. pp. 53-74. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/pl00022268 Tranøy, K. E. (1988). Science and Ethics. Some of the main principles and problems. In The Moral Import of Science. London: Sigma Distribution. pp. 111-120. page 5
DSP100_3 - PhD Course in Philosophy of Science and Ethics Approximately 750 pages: 500 pages for philosophy of science and 250 pages for research ethics. page 6