PHI446 Mid-Sem Sample 2015

PHI 446: Philosophy of Science Mid Semester Exam-1 Date: 11 Sep 2015
Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur
Answer all questions. Write answers in a separate booklet.

Max. Marks: 30 Time: 2 hourS
1. Answer whether the following statements are True or False. (10)
1. The potential falsifier for ∀x (Ax → Bx ) is Aa ∧ Bb where a and b are in X.

2. Let α, β be the conceivable natural laws stated respectively as follows. α= All
heavenly bodies which move in closed orbits move in circles; or more briefly: All
orbits of heavenly bodies are circles. β= All orbits of planets are circles. Then β is
said to have higher degree of universality and has more empirical content than that
of α.
3. A statement x is said to be falsifiable to a higher degree or better testable than
statement y, if and only if the class of potential falsifiers of x excludes the class of
potential falsifiers of y as a proper subclass.
4. The statement, All samples of yellow phosphorous under standard conditions melt
at 42 degrees C, is called an observational statement.
5. To say that the statement is a priori is to say that its truth can be known with
appeal to experience.
6. According to Logical positivism, in order to have have meaning, a given statement
had to be connected to either empirical data or analytic truth
7. According to Logical Positivists, the sentences, water is the principle of the world
or the spirit is the principle of the world are void of meaning because a meaningless
word occurs in them.
8. According to logical positivism, metaphysics is disposed of not because it is false,
but because it is composed of statements which are largely nonsense in the sense
that they are neither analytic nor empirically verifiable.
9. The statement, every genuine proposition must be either analytic or empirically
verifiable is both analytic and empirically verifiable.
10. Rationalism is the view that ultimately every meaningful word must get its meaning
from referring to some thing that we can directly experience, primarily a sensation.
2. Answer ANY FOUR of the following questions. Each question carries 5 marks (20)
1. The sun rises every 24 hours is a claim supposedly established by Induction, over
many instances, as each passing day has added another data point to the overwhelm-
ing evidence for it. Inductive arguments take n cases and extend the pattern to the
n + 1st. The principle of the uniformity of nature1 is used to justify induction in
such arguments. How do you justify inductive arguments without invoking principle
of uniformity of nature?
1
The principle that the future will resemble the past, in that when suﬃciently similar situations recur,
similar eﬀects follow. For example, if X is the cause of Y , then Y will necessarily exist whenever X exists.
2. If we accept conclusive verifiability as our criterion of significance, as some positivists

have proposed, our argument will prove too much. It is of the very nature of these
propositions(Law statements) that their truth cannot be established with certainty
by any finite series of observations. Explain how strong verification fail to account
for law statements. If so why do we insist on strong verification as a criterion for
meaningfulness of a statement? How exact laws such as universal law of gravitation
can be accommodated in logical positivism?
3. The standard Inductivist notion of science maintains that the origin of our basic
scientific concepts are found in observations. Do you subscribe to this view or mere
observations are distorting, confusing and fruitless., but one must be guided by prior
knowledge (prior hypothesis). Why do yo think scientific knowledge is often more
than just a list of observable facts?
4. The following argument is taken from one of the Sherlock Holmes stories written
by Arthur Conan Doyle. The story goes as follows. There is a footprint on the
floor next to the murder victim made by very peculiarity shaped sole. The only place
you can buy shoes which make that sort of foot print is China. Therefore, murderer
must have been to China. Is this deductive or inductive argument? If it is inductive
argument then state clearly what constitutes a good inductive argument?
5. Explain why according Karl Popper, Einstein’s theory of general relativity is gen-
uinely scientific whereas Adler’s theory of individual psychology(an individual adopts
a style of life which tends to relieve feelings of inferiority), Marx’s theory of his-
tory(society as fundamentally determined by the material conditions at any given
time) are pseudo scientific. Do you agree with Karl Popper’s criteria of falsification?
6. Karl Popper considered astrology to be a belief system that is not falsifiable, even
though it is empirically based. Karl Popper argues that astrologers make vague pre-
dictions, explain away their failures, and , in that way, make their theory untestable.
But Astrology survives, as do may pseudo sciences, because it fulfills the human need
to believe that there is order and meaning to our lives. Explain while using the falsi-
fiability criteria of Karl Popper, how astrology may be treated as pseudo scientific?
The End
I am convinced that it is impossible to expound the methods of induction

in a sound manner, without resting them upon the theory of probability.
Page 2 of 3
Perfect knowledge alone can give certainty, and in nature perfect knowledge
would be infinite knowledge, which is clearly beyond our capacities. We have,
therefore, to content ourselves with partial knowledge– knowledge mingled
with ignorance, producing doubt.
. . . William Stanley Jevons, The Principles of Science: A Treatise on Logic
and Scientific Method, 2nd edition (1877), 197.
If we take in our hand any volume; of divinity or school metaphysics, for

instance; let us ask, Does it contain any abstract reasoning concerning quan-
tity or number? No. Does it contain any experimental reasoning concerning
matter of fact and existence? No. Commit it then to the flames: for it can
contain nothing but sophistry and illusion.
. . . David Hume An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding (1748), ed.
L. A. Selby-Bigge (1894), section 12, part 3, 165.
Page 3 of 3

PHI446 Mid-Sem Sample 2015

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PHI446 Mid-Sem Sample 2015

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PHI446 Mid-Sem Sample 2015

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PHI 446: Philosophy of Science Mid Semester Exam-1 Date: 11 Sep 2015

Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur

Answer all questions. Write answers in a separate booklet.

1. Answer whether the following statements are True or False. (10)

1. The potential falsifier for ∀x (Ax → Bx ) is Aa ∧ Bb where a and b are in X.

2. If we accept conclusive verifiability as our criterion of significance, as some positivists

I am convinced that it is impossible to expound the methods of induction

If we take in our hand any volume; of divinity or school metaphysics, for

You might also like