Philosophy of the Humanities (Language & Literature)

 1.       What does Popper mean by ‘induction’ and the ‘problem of induction’?

2.       What is Popper’s main reason to reject the inductive approach in science? How does he suggest to replace it?

3.       In his chapter Popper frequently uses the term ‘metaphysical’. Try to determine what he means by this (on p. 38 he gives a brief example: ‘speculative atomism’ as a ‘metaphysical idea’). Think about what his stance on ‘metaphysics’ means for his view of the process of scientific discovery (and put your thoughts on paper…).

4.       What could Popper’s view of the demarcation between science and pseudo-science (or empirical science and non-empirical science) mean for theories and critical approaches in the humanities? Can you think of a theory or hypothesis in your field of studies that meets Popper’s ‘criterion of demarcation’? If a theory you have worked with does not meet the criterion, would that be relevant?

For your understanding of the text it might be helpful to know that the ‘positivists’ mentioned by Popper are the ‘logical empiricists’ discussed by Leezenberg/de Vries in ch. 3.

Wilson

1.       In his book, Wilson puts forward the idea of ‘consilience’, the consonance and unification of knowledge from the science and humanities. Which role does the notion of ‘interpretation’ play in this view and what does he mean by this term?

2.       Why is the concept of metaphor important for Wilson’s claims concerning ‘gene-culture co-evolution’?

3.       Do you find Wilsons arguments for the existence of a ‘human nature’ convincing or not? In how far are they relevant for your own field of studies?

4.       Do you think that any (which?) form of interdisciplinarity of your field of studies with approaches from the natural sciences would be desirable?