PLS2607/201/1/2019

Tutorial letter 201/1/2019

Philosophy of Science
PLS2607

Semester 1

Department of Philosophy, Practical and

Systematic Theology
Discipline of Philosophy

This tutorial letter contains important feedback information on your first

assignment, and further information for the successful completion of your
second assignment.
 CONTENTS

Page

1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 3
2. Assessment plan for PLS2607 ................................................................................................... 3
3. Answers for and feedback related to Assignment 01 (unique number: 615200) .................... 3
4. Preparation for Assignment 02 (unique number: 781338) ..................................................... 11
5. Use of myUnisa ......................................................................................................................... 15

2
 PLS2607/201/1/2019

1. Introduction

Dear students of PLS2607: Philosophy of Science,

Once again, a warm welcome to the study of this module. I trust that your studies are well under way and
that you have begun reading the content of the module.

The purpose of Assignment 01 (unique number: 615200) was to direct your reading such that you would
be able to gain a broad grasp of the terminology utilised within the Philosophical subfield of Philosophy of
Science. In this follow-up tutorial letter, you will be given feedback on the correct answers to the twenty
multiple choice questions which you were to answer for the successful completion of Assignment 01.

To provide you with preparation for the fruitful completion of Assignment 02, which takes the form of an
essay, this tutorial letter will also give you some pointers for the writing of philosophical essays. Please
ensure that you study this information very carefully, as you will find it invaluable in the process of your
essay writing.

Finally, some mention is made of the use of myUnisa.

2. Assessment plan for PLS2607

As you begin your assignments for this module, please bear in mind the weight which each assessment
carries to the composition of your final module mark:

Formative assessment Summative FINAL

(40% of final mark) assessment MODULE
+ (60% of final mark) = MARK
Assignment 01 + Assignment 02 Examination (100%
(16% of final mark) (24% of final mark)

As each assessment component comprises a significant percentage of your final module mark, you are
encouraged to submit each assignment, on time, and completed to the very best of your ability.

3. Answers for and feedback related to Assignment 01 (unique number: 615200)

In this multiple choice assignment you were required to:

3
  Select the one correct answer from the four options provided for each of the twenty multiple choice
questions;
 This could have either been completed on myUnisa or by submitting the mark-reading sheet to the
University.

For each question, the correct answer is highlighted in black, and the location of where you can
find the correct answer and the rationale for the answer from the Study Guide, is provided below
the question

1. Identify the label given to an hypothesis which is additional and enables the scientist to
infer a test implication.

1) Auxiliary
2) Counterfactual
3) Ad hoc
4) Core (2)

ANSWER: 1 (Refer to Study Guide, P. 135)

2. What is the assumed position called which implies that scientific theories are able to
describe the “world” as it is?

1) Reductivism
2) Rationalism
3) Relativism
4) Realism (2)

ANSWER: 4 (Refer to Study Guide, P. 137)

3. What does “feminism” argue for?

1) That although men are physically stronger than women, women are able to do all
that men can.
2) That the rights of women are absolutely equivalent to those of men in every
regard.
3) That women are fundamentally superior to men, particularly in terms of
mathematical literacy.

4
 PLS2607/201/1/2019

4) That men, historically and currently, oppress women, and thus women should be
empowered. (2)

ANSWER: 2 (Refer to Study Guide, P. 136)

4. Complete the following statement making use of the correct option provided below:

“Hypothetico-deductivism proposes that an hypothesis may not be ______________, but

only ______________.”

1) Corroborated; falsified
2) Denied; confirmed
3) Verified; falsified
4) Untrue; valid

ANSWER: 3 (Study Guide, P. 135) (2)

5. Which of the following instances is not an example of “science”?

1) Biochemistry
2) Psychology
3) Statistics
4) Palmistry (2)

ANSWER: 4 (Refer to Study Guide, P. 2)

6. In which sub-discipline do the roots of Philosophy of Science most lie?

1) Natural Philosophy
2) Epistemology
3) Metaphysics
4) Philosophy of Aesthetics (2)

ANSWER: 1 (Refer to Study Guide, P. 3)

5
7. The “problem of demarcation” refers to which of the following?

1) The identification of what should be classified as science..

2) The determination of the demarcated boundaries of knowledge.
3) The classification of phenomena into sub-fields of science.
4) The demarcation of a good scientific theory from a poor one. (2)

ANSWER: 1 (Refer to Study Guide, P. 5)

8. If Popperian demarcation considers psychoanalysis to be “pseudoscience”, what would

such demarcation identify bioengineering as?

1) Science
2) Pseudo-science
3) Non-science
4) Technology (2)

ANSWER: 1 (Study Guide, Pp. 4-5, 138)

9. What did the “social” turn in philosophy of science essentially imply for the scientific
project?

1) That science is the product of the social activities of scientists.

2) That science is only understood as the product of many scientists.
3) That science should not be considered as absolute or objective.
4) That science was just one among multiple activities of the human. (2)

ANSWER: 3 (Study Guide, P. 8)

10. Which philosopher argued as follows?

“[T]he hallmark of scientific behaviour is a certain scepticism even towards one’s most
cherished theories. Blind commitment to a theory is not an intellectual virtue: it is an
intellectual crime.”

1) Paul Feyerabend
2) Imre Lakatos

6
 PLS2607/201/1/2019

3) Karl Popper
4) Etienne Gilson (2)

ANSWER: 2 (Refer to Study Guide, P. 2)

11. Match the description in Column A to the example in Column B:

Column A: Column B:
I) Science a) Mobile phones
II) Non-science b) The Book of Genesis
III) Pseudoscience c) Intelligent Design theory
IV) Technology d) Evolutionary theory

1) I:b; II:d; III:a; IV:c

2) I:d; II:b; III:c; IV:a
3) I:d; II:c; III:b; IV:a
4) I:d; II:c; III:b; IV:a (2)

ANSWER: 2 (Refer to Study Guide, pp. 4-5, 138)

As options 3 and 4 of question 11 are erroneously identical, students were informed on

4th February 2019 via myUnisa that they were to select the correct answer from among
options 1 and 2 only.

12. Complete the following sentence making use of one of the options provided below:

“Science in the spirit of modernity, is often assumed to be ________________ and

________________.”

1) Objective; rational
2) Subjective; rational
3) Objective; tentative
4) Absolute; subjective (2)

ANSWER: 1 (Refer to Study Guide, P. 11)

7
13. Which definition best describes “objectivity” in the context of science?

1) The thesis that scientific research is always the product of a subject which focuses
on an object.
2) The supposition that scientific research is undertaken without bias and is founded
in empirical evidence.
3) The assumption that scientific research is never faulty and is always absolutely
truthful.
4) The belief that scientific theories accurately reflect reality in the results of their
research. (2)

ANSWER: 2 (Refer to Study Guide, P. 11)

14. Which of the following options is not a rational goal of science?

1) Making precise predictions about the natural world.

2) Rejecting false theories about the natural world.
3) Uncovering fundamental truths about the natural world.
4) Generating beautiful theories about the natural world. (2)

ANSWER: 4 (Refer to Study Guide, P. 12)

15. Which of the following options is not a reason for equating science with religious belief?

1) As much as religion was the dominant belief system in the West, science is now.
2) As religious leaders exerted influence over peoples as experts, so too do
scientists.
3) Science is absolutely objective and unchanging so it is inherently distinct from
religion.
4) People of faith and people of science both hold to beliefs in their chosen approach. (2)

ANSWER: 3 (Refer to Study Guide, Pp. 12-13)

16. Identify which activity would not contribute to the development of objectivity in scientific
research.

1) Accommodating criticism.
2) Arguing against critique.

8
 PLS2607/201/1/2019

3) Researching in teams.
4) Submitting to peer review. (2)

ANSWER: 2 (Refer to Study Guide, P. 15)

17. Match the definition in Column A to the correct term in Column B:

Column A: Column B:
I) Scientific activity accurately a) Value-free science
represents the way in which the
world is.
II) Scientific activity done in isolation, b) Subjectivity
without the community’s
involvement.
III) Scientific activity’s theories are c) Objectivity
merely convenient explanations of
observed phenomena.
IV) Scientific activity undertaken without d) Instrumentalism
the contamination of non-objective
aspects.

1) I:d; II:b; III:c; IV:a

2) I:c; II:b; III:d; IV:a
3) I:a; II:b; III:c; IV:d
4) I:c; II:a; III:b; IV:d (2)

ANSWER: 2 (Refer to Study Guide, Pp. 14-16)

18. Which movement in the philosophy of science held that scientists are merely passive
observers and recorders of phenomena?

1) Falsificationism
2) Positivism
3) Instrumentalism
4) Realism (2)

ANSWER: 2 (Refer to Study Guide, P. 21)

9
19. Complete the following sentence making use of one of the options provided below:

“Scientific laws of nature are __________________ because they

__________________.”

1) Particular; refer to certain observed phenomena.

2) Subjective; are constructed by individual scientists.
3) Relative; are always relevant to a context.
4) Universal; refer to all objects in a particular class. (2)

ANSWER: 4 (Refer to Study Guide, P. 23)

20. Match the proposition in Column A to the description which best identifies it in Column B:

Column A: Column B:
I) All “Nguni cattle” are characterised a) Empirical fact
by their low cervicothoracic humps in
front of their front legs. This is their
defining feature.
II) The sculptures of the Nigerian artist b) Definitional proposition
Peju Alatise are simply the most
beautiful and humorous, as he uses
comedy in his artworks to make
them more accessible.
III) Twelve people have walked on the c) Law of nature
surface of the Moon, since the first
Moon landing on 21st July 1969
when Neil Armstrong placed his feet
on the Moon.
IV) The absolute pressure exerted by a d) Value statement
given mass of an ideal gas is
inversely proportional to the volume
it occupies if the temperature and
amount of gas remain unchanged
within a closed system.

1) I:b; II:d; III:a; IV:c

2) I:d; II:b; III:a; IV:c

10
 PLS2607/201/1/2019

3) I:a; II:c; III:d; IV:b

4) I:b; II:d; III:c; IV:a (2)

ANSWER: 1 (Refer to Study Guide, P. 23)

4. Preparation for Assignment 02 (unique number: 781338)

We would like to draw your attention to the following points, which will assist you in the completion of your
second assignment:

4.1. Plagiarism:

Every idea that you use in your work which is not your own unique work needs to be referenced such
that you do not commit plagiarism. This applies as much to direct quotations as it does to
paraphrasing. You need to follow the instructions for referencing provided by the Discipline of
Philosophy. These can be obtained in the additional resources section of PLS2607’s myUnisa page
or by consultation with the Tutorial Letter 301 (WYSALLB).

Referencing (both within the text of your assignment and in a bibliography) IS NOT
OPTIONAL. Be aware that the University of South Africa can take action against students who
plagiarise.

Moreover, you will be awarded marks for your use of referencing techniques, and will be penalised
for a lack of referencing techniques. Please be aware of this.

4.2. Keeping to the assignment topic:

A major problem facing students is not keeping to the assigned topics. It is imperative that this is
done, as without maintaining focus on the question asked, the answer provided is irrelevant to the
assignment and your assignment result will be poor.

Our suggestion is that when you consider the question, attempt firstly to find out what is being asked
of you. Once you adequately understand the topic, direct your research to the relevant information
required.

11
4.3. Assignment lengths:

For Assignment 02, please take note of the length of essays: keep your assignments to the word
limits specified in the Tutorial Letter 101 – that means Assignment 02 should be no longer than
1000 words. Please indicate the number of words out of which your assignment is comprised. You
will be penalised if you exceed this word limit.

4.4. A philosophical approach to writing essays:

This section should assist you in the content-development of your second assignment (unique
number: 781338, with due date 29th March 2019).

As many registered for this module are not Philosophy majors, a technique for essay writing in the
Philosophical manner may be foreign. Thus, here we explain a simple method to follow when you
are asked to “discuss”, “critically discuss” or “evaluate” a topic in the format of an essay for this
module.

When given one of the aforementioned instructions (or similar), it is important to bear in mind that
you are required to give your critical thoughts on issues as well as to explain particular theories. This
does not mean that you should write down any meanderings your mind may take you on. Rather,
what you should provide is relevant information that makes logical sense and which can be backed
up with evidence.

Philosophy is a discipline that occurs best in dialogue: in conversation between people. It is

important, therefore – as in a discussion – to examine issues from different perspectives. This is
known as developing the dialectic, and the specific methodology we wish to make you aware of is
the Hegelian Dialectic.

Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831) argued that history progresses in a dialectical manner.1
Following his analysis of Hegel’s work, Heinrich Moritz Chalybaus exposed the Hegelian Dialectic,
which proposes that after a thesis (a theory/idea) is presented someone else may develop a counter
theory, i.e. an anti-thesis (Mueller, 1958:413-414). These are then merged into a combinatory theory
known as a synthesis (Mueller, 1958:413-414). And so the process continues with the synthesis
becoming the new thesis, resulting in a new anti-thesis to be created, and so on (Mueller, 1958:413-
414).

1 Burrell, 1991.

12
 PLS2607/201/1/2019

The Hegelian Dialectic can be illustrated as follows:

Critical reflection on a “thesis” results in the

development of an “anti-thesis”

Thesis Antithesis Dialogue between

the ideas of the
“thesis” and that of
the “anti-thesis”
form a new idea, a
“syn-thesis”.
Synthesis

In developing your essay assignments for Philosophy, you may use the dialectical method, which
will enable you to better critically discuss topics in that you will be able to expose and explain a theory
(a “thesis”), and then to critically evaluate it (generate an “anti-thesis”). The combinatory product of
this can serve as the conclusion of your essay.

If you have further queries of this methodology, please do not hesitate to contact either of your
lecturers (our contact details are included at the end of this tutorial letter).

4.5. Assessment criteria used to evaluate essays in Philosophy of Science:

The following rubric is employed in the assessment of your essays. It is included here, so that you
will be able to ascertain what we are looking for when assessing your essays. This “checklist” should
assist you in becoming aware of what is expected of you as you write the second assignment.

It would be prudent for you to work through the rubric employed, such that you can ascertain – prior
to submission of your essay – the extent to which your essay conforms to the expectations
demanded.

13
14
 PLS2607/201/1/2019

5. Use of myUnisa

We would like to encourage the greater use of myUnisa by PLS2607 students. You will find that coupled
with many additional online resources (including learning units for each study unit of the module), there
are opportunities online to engage with us, via the discussion forums. Within the discussion forums, please
feel free to post your problems and concerns and we will attempt to respond to them timeously.

We hope that you have found this Tutorial Letter useful. Should you have any queries, questions, etc.,
please do not hesitate to contact us.

With kind regards, and best wishes for your studies in Philosophy of Science,

Prof. Callum D. Scott & Dr. Yolandi M. Coetser

Discipline of Philosophy
Department of Philosophy, Practical and Systematic Theology

Telephone: +27 12 429 6207 Telephone: +27 12 429 6596

e-mail: scottcd@unisa.ac.za e-mail: coetsym@unisa.ac.za

Bibliography:

(Please make use of the format of this bibliography as an example of the bibliographic
format that is required for use in your own assignments [i.e. the Harvard Method]. More
information is available as an additional resource on the PLS2607 myUnisa page, and from
the Tutorial Letter 301 [WYSALLB].)

1. Burrell, D. 1991. A Historian looks at Hegel Philosophically: Critical examination of Hegelian Dialectic,
Determinism, and Contingency. Retrieved 23 February 2010 from the World Wide Web, URL:
http://www.historicalinsights.com/dave/hegel.html.
2. Mueller, G.E. 1958. “The Hegel Legend of ‘Thesis-Antithesis-Synthesis’.”, Journal of the History of
Ideas, 19(3):411-414.
3. Scott, C.D. & Mungwini, P. 2015. Philosophy of Science: Only study guide for PLS2607. Pretoria:
University of South Africa.

15