This experience is optimized for Internet Explorer version 9 and above.

Please upgrade your browser

Video title

Priority Code

Cancel
Science Wars: What Scientists Know and How They Know It

Science Wars: What Scientists Know and How They Know It

Course No.  1235
Course No.  1235
Share:
Sale
Video or Audio?
While this set works well in both audio and video format, one or more of the courses in this set feature graphics to enhance your learning experience, including illustrations, images of people and event, and on-screen text.
Which Format Should I Choose? Video Download Audio Download DVD CD
Watch or listen immediately with FREE streaming
Available on most courses
Stream using apps on your iPad, iPhone, Android, or Kindle Fire
Available on most courses
Stream to your internet connected PC or laptop
Available on most courses
Download files for offline viewing or listening
Receive DVDs or CDs for your library
Play as many times as you want
All formats include Free Streaming
All formats include Free Streaming

Course Overview

About This Course

24 lectures  |  31 minutes per lecture

Choose one: (A) Science gives us objective knowledge of an independently existing reality. (B) Scientific knowledge is always provisional and tells us nothing that is universal, necessary, or certain about the world. Welcome to the science wars—a long-running battle over the status of scientific knowledge that began in ancient Greece, raged furiously among scientists, social scientists, and humanists during the 1990s, and has re-emerged in today's conflict between science and religion over issues such as evolution.

Professor Steven L. Goldman, whose Teaching Company course on Science in the 20th Century was praised by customers as "a scholarly achievement of the highest order" and "excellent in every way," leads you on a quest for the nature of scientific reasoning in this intellectually pathbreaking lecture series,

View More

Choose one: (A) Science gives us objective knowledge of an independently existing reality. (B) Scientific knowledge is always provisional and tells us nothing that is universal, necessary, or certain about the world. Welcome to the science wars—a long-running battle over the status of scientific knowledge that began in ancient Greece, raged furiously among scientists, social scientists, and humanists during the 1990s, and has re-emerged in today's conflict between science and religion over issues such as evolution.

Professor Steven L. Goldman, whose Teaching Company course on Science in the 20th Century was praised by customers as "a scholarly achievement of the highest order" and "excellent in every way," leads you on a quest for the nature of scientific reasoning in this intellectually pathbreaking lecture series, Science Wars: What Scientists Know and How They Know It.

Those who have taken Professor Goldman's previous course, which is an intensive survey of the revolution in scientific knowledge from 1900 to 2000, may have wondered: if what counts as scientific knowledge can transform so dramatically within only 100 years, what exactly is scientific knowledge? Science Wars addresses this surprisingly difficult question.

Five Centuries of the Science Wars

In 24 half-hour lectures, Science Wars explores the history of competing conceptions of scientific knowledge and their implications for science and society from the onset of the Scientific Revolution in the 1600s to the present. It may seem that the accelerating pace of discoveries, inventions, and unexpected insights into nature during this period guarantees the secure foundations of scientific inquiry, but that is far from true. Consider these cases:

  • The scientific method: In the 1600s the English philosopher Francis Bacon defined the scientific method in its classic form: the use of inductive reasoning to draw conclusions from an exhaustive body of facts. But "no scientist has ever been a strict Baconian," says Professor Goldman. "If you followed that, you would get nowhere."
  • A "heated" debate: Around 1800 the dispute over the nature of heat was resolved in favor of the theory that heat is motion and not a substance given off during burning. But then the French mathematical physicist Joseph Fourier wrote a set of equations that accurately described how heat behaves regardless of what it "really" is, which, Fourier contended, was not a scientific question at all.
  • Paradigm shifts: The publication in 1962 of Thomas Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions precipitated a radical change in attitudes toward scientific knowledge, prompted by Kuhn's insight that science is not an entirely rational enterprise, and that its well-established theories (or paradigms) are overturned in a revolutionary, nonlogical process.
  • Postmodern putdown: The postmodern attack on science as a privileged mode of inquiry made some headway in the late 20th century. But the credibility of the movement wilted in 1996, when a postmodern journal unwittingly published a spoof by physicist Alan Sokal, purporting to prove that physical theory was socially constructed. Sokal then exposed his piece as a parody.
  • In the penultimate lecture of the course, Professor Goldman considers intelligent design—the argument that evolution can't account for the immense complexity of life and that a master designer must be at work. He approaches this topical debate by asking: What are the minimum criteria that define a hypothesis as scientific, and does intelligent design qualify? Having already covered five centuries of the science wars in the previous lectures, you will analyze this controversy with a set of tools that allows you to see the issues in a sharp, new light.

What Is Reality?

"Fasten your seatbelts," says Professor Goldman at the outset of Lecture 21—an advisory that applies equally to the whole course, which covers an astonishing array of ideas and thinkers. Throughout, Professor Goldman never loses his narrative thread, which begins 2,400 years ago with Plato's allegorical battle between "the gods" and "the earth giants"—between those for whom knowledge is universal, necessary, and certain; and those for whom it cannot be so and is based wholly on experience.

The problem of what constitutes scientific knowledge can be illustrated with one of the most famous and widely accepted scientific theories of all time, Nicolaus Copernicus's heliostatic (stationary sun) theory of the solar system, which has undergone continual change since it was first proposed in 1543:

  • Copernicus called for the planets to move in uniform circular motion around the sun, slightly displaced from the center.
  • Using observations by Tycho Brahe, Johannes Kepler revised the Copernican model, discarding the ancient dogma of circular motion, which did not fit the data. Instead, he guessed that the planets in fact move in elliptical orbits.
  • In his influential work endorsing the Copernican theory, Galileo ignored Kepler's corrections and opted for circular motion. Notoriously, the Catholic Church condemned Galileo for heresy. But the church was actually correct that he had no basis for claiming the heliocentric theory was true, rather than simply an interpretation of experience.
  • Galileo's picture of space was superseded by Newton's and later by Einstein's, which also will doubtless be revised.
  • Even something as basic as the elliptical motion of the planets is a vast oversimplification. There are no closed curves in space, since the solar system is moving around the center of the galaxy; the galaxy is moving within the local cluster; and the local cluster is also moving.

Although we still call the conventional picture of the solar system Copernican astronomy, there is effectively no resemblance between astronomy today and Copernicus's 1543 theory of the heavens. The same is also true of other theories, such as the atomic theory of matter. All scientific theories are in a state of ceaseless revision, which raises the question of what reality "really" is.

As the contemporary philosopher of science Mary Hesse has pointed out, the lesson of the history of science seems to be that the theories we currently hold to be true are as likely to be overturned as the theories they replaced!

Sharpen Your Understanding of What Science Is

The uncertainty about the status of scientific knowledge and about the objectivity of the scientific enterprise led to a broad assault on science in the late 20th century by sociologists, philosophers, and historians, many connected with the postmodern movement. The lectures covering this attack and the ensuing counterattack by scientists are some of the most thrilling in the course and involve a number of figures whom Professor Goldman knows personally.

Of one of the firebrands in this conflict, the late Viennese philosopher of science Paul Feyerabend, Professor Goldman says, "I myself took a seminar with Feyerabend when he was teaching at Berkeley in the early 1960s. … Feyerabend was not really off the wall, although he was often depicted that way. … He too recognized, as everyone must, that after all, science does work and science is knowledge of a sort. It's just not the absolute knowledge that scientists and philosophers have historically claimed that it is."

By the time you reach the end of this course, you will understand exactly what science is, and you will be enlightened about a fascinating problem that perhaps you didn't even know existed. "There have been a raft of popular books about what scientists know," says Professor Goldman, "but to the best of my knowledge, there is not a single one of these popular books that focuses centrally on the question of how scientists know what they know."

This course serves as that book.

View Less
24 Lectures
  • 1
    Knowledge and Truth Are Age-Old Problems
    What is it that scientists know, and how do they know what they know? The "science wars" in the late 20th century were a dispute within modern science that signals a deep, longstanding conflict over this question. x
  • 2
    Competing Visions of the Scientific Method
    This lecture casts doubt on the popular notion that the rise of modern science in the early 17th century was the result of discovering a single method for extracting objective truths about nature from subjective experience. x
  • 3
    Galileo, the Catholic Church, and Truth
    The Catholic Church has been cast as villain in its condemnation of Galileo, but a great deal hinges on whether Galileo possessed knowledge and was defending truth, or was promoting personal opinions based on his beliefs. x
  • 4
    Isaac Newton’s Theory of the Universe
    Isaac Newton's mathematical theory of gravity and motion works, and for more than 200 years was lauded as finally giving knowledge of physical reality. But Newtonian physics is wrong, in spite of "working." x
  • 5
    Science vs. Philosophy in the 17th Century
    From the beginning, modern science used novel instruments that disclosed realities that cannot be experienced directly. But the very novelty of these instruments raised questions about what it was they revealed. x
  • 6
    Locke, Hume, and the Path to Skepticism
    John Locke formulated the classic empirical theory of knowledge, while George Berkeley mounted a vigorous attack on modern science, and David Hume embraced skepticism, criticizing unjustifiable knowledge claims. x
  • 7
    Kant Restores Certainty
    Immanuel Kant invented a philosophical system that guaranteed universal, necessary, and certain knowledge, but at a price. We could have knowledge of experience, but not of the world as it "really" is, beyond experience. x
  • 8
    Science, Society, and the Age of Reason
    The role that scientific knowledge plays in society today is the realization of the 18th-century Enlightenment vision linking social reform and the idea of progress to reason by way of science. x
  • 9
    Science Comes of Age in the 19th Century
    In spite of science's growing applicability to the real world through technology, scientists began to question the relationship between theories and reality, influenced by such startling ideas as non-Euclidean geometry. x
  • 10
    Theories Need Not Explain
    Joseph Fourier and others showed that a theory can provide prediction and control without describing realities behind experience. But then as now, the dominant view was that scientific theories reveal what is really out there. x
  • 11
    Knowledge as a Product of the Active Mind
    William Whewell invented the term "scientist" and tried to demonstrate that creative activity by the mind is a fundamental factor in scientific reasoning, and that the history of science is crucial in understanding this process. x
  • 12
    Trading Reality for Experience
    This lecture looks at thinkers as diverse as Ernst Mach, Pierre Duhem, and Heinrich Hertz, who argued from three different perspectives that theories were non-unique interpretations of experience, not descriptions of reality. x
  • 13
    Scientific Truth in the Early 20th Century
    Ironically, just as science increasingly mattered to the general public, and for that reason scientific knowledge was accepted as true, the 19th-century scientific theories responsible for this perception were being discarded! x
  • 14
    Two New Theories of Scientific Knowledge
    The most proscience philosophies in the first half of the 20th century were logical positivism, which embraced the primacy of scientific knowledge, and pragmatism, a homegrown American philosophy that rejected it. x
  • 15
    Einstein and Bohr Redefine Reality
    Relativity and quantum theory raised new questions about the relationship of science to reality. This lecture addresses these questions, which continue unresolved to this day. x
  • 16
    Truth, Ideology, and Thought Collectives
    The most radical theory of scientific knowledge to be formulated in the 1930s came from immunologist Ludwik Fleck, who used the history of syphilis as a vehicle for exploring what scientists know and how they know it. x
  • 17
    Kuhn's Revolutionary Image of Science
    The 1962 publication of Thomas Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions sparked a reassessment by intellectuals of the privileged status of scientific knowledge and more broadly of the possibility of true objectivity. x
  • 18
    Challenging Mainstream Science from Within
    Scientific thinking has a collective character shaped by education and professional community life, but scientific theories also evolve, and highly credentialed "outsiders" play a role. x
  • 19
    Objectivity Under Attack
    Israel Scheffler and Paul Feyerabend assumed opposite stances in response to Kuhn's thesis. Independently, Michel Foucault and Jacques Derrida launched an attack on the very possibility of objective knowledge. x
  • 20
    Scientific Knowledge as Social Construct
    In the 1980s, a consensus formed that scientific and technological knowledge were not value-neutral, but the products of communal practices deeply affected by professional and societal values. x
  • 21
    New Definitions of Objectivity
    While many intellectuals after 1960 were busily denouncing Western ideals of rationality, knowledge, and truth as politically motivated myths, many philosophers of science proposed defensible theories of scientific realism. x
  • 22
    Science Wars of the Late 20th Century
    In 1996, a postmodern journal addressed the science wars after a decade of hostility between scientists and supporters of the social construction view. The journal unwittingly published a parody of postmodernism known as Sokal's hoax. x
  • 23
    Intelligent Design and the Scope of Science
    Is intelligent design a scientific hypothesis? This question highlights issues of who defines what science is, what constitutes good science, and what words like rationality, truth, knowledge, and reality mean. x
  • 24
    Truth, History, and Citizenship
    At a time when science is involved in profound social, moral, and environmental challenges, misunderstanding the positions of competing interpretations of science is an obstacle to effective action. x

Lecture Titles

Clone Content from Your Professor tab

Your professor

Steven L. Goldman
Ph.D. Steven L. Goldman
Lehigh University
Dr. Steven L. Goldman is the Andrew W. Mellon Distinguished Professor in the Humanities at Lehigh University, where he has taught for 30 years. He earned his B.S. in Physics at the Polytechnic University of New York and his M.A. and Ph.D. in Philosophy from Boston University. Before taking his position at Lehigh, Professor Goldman taught at The Pennsylvania State University, where he was a cofounder of one of the first U.S. academic programs in science, technology, and society studies. Professor Goldman has received the Lindback Distinguished Teaching Award from Lehigh University. A prolific author, he has written or edited eight books, including Science, Technology, and Human Progress, and he has an impressive list of scholarly articles and reviews to his credit. He has been a national lecturer for the scientific research society Sigma Xi and a national program consultant for the National Endowment for the Humanities.
View More information About This Professor
Also By This Professor
View All Courses By This Professor

Reviews

Rated 4.3 out of 5 by 75 reviewers.
Rated 5 out of 5 by Wonderfully Stimulating! In this series of 24 lectures, Professor Steven Goldman discusses at length a topic crucial to him but potentially little known to many of his potential listeners: the validity of scientific ‘truths‘, given many are profoundly revised over a period of sometimes only a few decades. Repeatedly, he brings back as an example the difference in the understanding of the Earth and the Universe in 1900 with respect to 2000: no plate tectonics, no molten core, no multiplicity of galaxies, no big bang, no expanding cosmos, etc. Were scientific facts then totally not valid? Are today’s any better? Are scientists gradually proceeding towards the discovery of an absolute Truth or are they swayed towards certain views by their philosophical and social milieus? Such questions are treated passionately and enthusiastically by Professor Goldman with a chrono-historical approach from the 17th century to the present. Admittedly, such philosophical discussions are theoretical and may seem far-fetched to some. Yet, this highly original series is thought-provoking and will prove interesting to all minimally familiar with the history of science. October 12, 2014
Rated 5 out of 5 by Complex The professor is extremely thorough! The course outline not only contains each lecture in detail but it also has short biographies of each person mentioned. There is a plethora of material in these lectures. Not for the lazy! October 12, 2014
Rated 5 out of 5 by Intellectually Stimulating Audio Review: This is the second course I have taken from Dr. Goldman. Among the over 40 courses (and over 30 instructors) I have taken from TGC, I find Dr. Goldman's to be the most intellectually stimulating. His depth and breadth of knowledge in history, philosophy and science is astounding. He moves at a crisp pace as he covers a lot of intellectual territory in each lecture. The "Science Wars" he discusses are basically regarding the intellectual nature of what can be learned from science. The basic conflict relates to whether science tells us about a reality that exists independent of human interaction or just the best description of the nature of the universe that human's experience. There are different corollaries of this basic "war" discussed, such as whether or not anything true in mathematics must exist in nature, but the "reality" vs "experience" theme is the basic battleground of the "Science Wars". Dr. Goldman takes the student through the progression of these battles (mostly between philosophers and "natural philosophers" (ie scientists) from the Enlightenment through today's 21st century. One very important point that Dr. Goldman comes back to several times throughout the course, is that scientific theory itself is not stagnant, it evolves with time as more knowledge is gained. More often than not this is as a result of finding new phenomena as we explore the infinite and infinitesimal regions beyond the scope of what was realizable previously. Sometimes conventional scientific wisdom does turn out to be wrong (e.g. the "plum pudding" model of the atom in light of Rutherford's experiments, or that the speed of light is greater if sourced from a moving object). Such is the consequence of having theory stand up to the test of experiment and/or observation. This course gives a progressive history of the "Science Wars" of the past several centuries along with the evolution of philosophy of knowledge itself that came with it. It is not intended to be a comprehensive view of current scientific or technological debates. Dr. Goldman is a very enthusiastic, articulate and emphatic lecturer. I took the first of his courses on video, but I found that audio version of this course quite sufficient. The accompanying course guide is excellent with quality lecture notes, intriguing questions to consider, a timeline, glossary, biographical notes, and an annotated bibliography. I strongly recommend this course to anyone interested in the history and/or philosophy of science. September 15, 2014
Rated 5 out of 5 by Not for People with The Answers or Tyros Already read Locke, Hume, Popper, Kuhn, Feyerabend, Medawar, et al, and this course is a great provider of summary and context for all those separate works. If you want a Golden Book of Famous Science Facts, this ain't it. If you're over the age of 40 and have been interested in the emergence of Science from the quagmire of metaphysics and the manga of religion, this is the place. Should come standard with every AAAS membership. July 12, 2014
2 3 4 next>>

Questions & Answers

Customers Who Bought This Course Also Bought

Some courses include Free digital streaming.

Enjoy instantly on your computer, laptop, tablet or smartphone.