Philosophy of Science

Select by subject:

Ethics

Philosophy (General)

Philosophy of Religion

Philosophy of Science

Philosophy of Mind

Philosophy of Art

Political Philosophy

Theory of Knowledge

Eastern Philosophy

Buddhism

Study skills

Get your books from Amazon - you get a discount; I get a royalty!

An apology for imbalance...  Feb 08

Since I'm working on a new edition of Religion and Science at the moment, most of the comments below are on that topic, but that's not my only area of interest!

Some books are readable and cover and yet utterly frustrating. God: the failed hypothesis by Victor Stenger wants to show that science has now advanced to a point at which it can show that God does not exist. Sadly, however good his science, Stenger's argument and logic is rather crude when it comes to philosophy and religious beliefs. In effect he has a 'no-gap-left-for-God' argument.  I'm rather torn, because I find myself in agreement with many of his conclusions, and yet frustrated by the glib and faulty logic or some of his arguments. Richard Dawkins proclaims on the cover that he 'learned an enormous amount' from the book, which is rather sad.

And while on the topic of Dawkins (whose work on science I find inspiring), here is a comment I posted for the Religion and Science page - as a warning to those tempted to assume that an eminent and articulate scientist will have a balanced and logical view on matters of religion...

'For those who, having admired his earlier work, are tempted to take Richard Dawkins' The God Delusion as a seriously argued work of philosophy or science, should read The Dawkins Delusion by Alister McGrath. This book, by a fellow Professor at Oxford who started his career as an atheist rather than a theologian and as a scientist, as a usefully negative function of showing just how far Dawkins has given up any pretence at serious argument in favour of re-cycling outdated atheist polemic. Although I was fearing an equally polemical theist tract, that was not the case. I found the book helpful, and a useful counterbalance to Dawkins.'

18th Feb, 2008... my view

"Science, it seems to me, has an obligation to take phenomena seriously and to attempt a balanced explanation of their causes and their place in the larger scheme of things. Religion, like morality, is a phenomenon to be studied and, if possible, explained. Religion is NOT simply to be identified with belief in God - it is far more complex than that. Why it persists, in the face of huge intellectual difficulties with many of its claims, is a fascinating subject worthy of serious philosophical and scientific scrutiny."

There is a chapter on Philosophy of Science in my TY: Philosophy, giving a brief historical overview, followed by an introduction to some key issues, and another in World Philosophy, which was written by Alexander Bird.

For those styudying the Philosophy of Science module for AQA A2 level, there is a chapter (originally written by the late Rupert Woodfin) in Understanding Philosophy for A2 Level, giving the basics that are required for that examination.

At the same level, Unit 4 in Philosophy for AS and A2, written by Nicholas Wilson, also covers the basic ground, with sections on scientific method, objectivity, the nature of scientific development and so on.

Controversial when it comes to all matters relating to religion (and incline to indulge in polemic rather than reason or evidence), I still think that, when it comes to an enthusiastic and brilliant exposition of science, Dawkins is the one to read. Unweaving the Rainbow was the book that, for me, demonstrated his enthusiasm at its best - showing that science need not preclude a sense of wonder at nature.

 All material © Mel Thompson unless otherwise attributed