Quiz 1: The class average was 3.57 points--roughly half the possible points, with a very bimodal distribution. Some comments concerning specific questions follow.
- Question 1
- This was not well-solved at all. Note that Hume thinks that there are in principle two ways in which induction could be justified: logically and by experience.
- Many correctly stated that inductive inferences are not deductively valid--but that's just the starting point of the problem!
- Question 2
- Many people left this one blank--always try to say something!
- Note also that I basically gave it away during lecture that I was going to ask this...
- Question 3
- Laudan isn't a creationist; neither did he defend 'intelligent design', as a number of you seem to believe!
- Make sure, as always, that you respond to all parts of the question!
- Question 4
- A number of you thought that the two components were empiricism and positivism, when instead it's the deductive and nomological aspects of the model (hence the name!).
- Question 6
- Flag pole example.
- Look it up if you didn't get them right. You should generally do that for every question you get wrong.
Quiz 2: The class average was 3.35 points--clearly too low, with again a very bimodal distribution. Some comments concerning specific questions follow.
- Question 2
- Kitcher gives a unificationist account of explanation, he doesn't propose the best-systems analysis of laws of nature, as some of you seem to believe!
- Question 3
- I expected students to mention and explain the central notions of Humean supervenience and of 'governing'.
- Question 4
- Say something about the distinction between the accidental and the lawful, and the implied idea of counterfactual support.
Midterm paper: The average was 18.03 points. A few remarks:
- Several of you unnecessarily lost points because they submitted too late, or didn't include a word count, or went over it, or had incomplete references.
- In many cases, it would have been better if you had concentrated on fewer criteria or arguments or points, and instead discussed those fewer points more in depth.
- You should try not just to rehash class material, as some of you did, but instead articulate your own thoughts!
- When you use internet sources (or really any sources), you should always ask yourself how reliable the information is, which often means that you should have some idea about the reliability of the source.
Quiz 3: The class average was 3.65 points, slightly better than on previous quizzes. Some comments concerning specific questions follow. Look up the questions you didn't get right!
- Question 3
- That's Hempel's raven paradox, of course. Some of you stated that 'All ravens are black' is equivalent to 'All non-ravens are non-black'. But that's not true: in a universe consisting just of black objects, some of which are ravens and some of which are shoes, the first statement is true, but the second isn't.
Quiz 4: The class average was 4.74 points, significantly improved over previous quizzes. Congratulations! Generally, the Kuhn questions (1-3) were well solved, the others less so. Question 5 on feminist standpoint epistemology was particularly badly solved--almost nobody got that right.