Phylosophical Problems of Sciencie Knowledge

Major: Pharmaceuticals technologies
Code of subject: 7.226.01.M.22
Credits: 3.00
Department: Philosophy
Lecturer: Doctor of Sciences in Philosophy, Prof. V.L.Petrushenko
Semester: 2 семестр
Mode of study: денна
Learning outcomes: As a result of learning the discipline, the student must be able to demonstrate the following learning outcomes: to know: - the features of modern science and its place in social life; - peculiarities and essential features of science, its fundamental foundations and problem areas; - to know the differences between the historical types of science, its connection with the human person, culture and the main spheres of social life; - know the most important criteria of scientific character of knowledge. be able to: - use the knowledge of the initial postulates and foundations of science to design their research work; - compare and analyze different types of knowledge and historical types of science; - apply the philosophical and methodological apparatus of theories of science in their own research work, using at the same time knowledge of methods and instruments of science.
Required prior and related subjects: No Required subjects Related subjects 1 Physics 2 Mathematics 3 Philosophy 4
Summary of the subject: The content of the program is aimed at in-depth study of the essence, state and prospects of the development of modern scientific knowledge in its relations with the philosophical, theoretical and methodological directions of cognition, to outline the main subject areas of the modern scientific picture of the world, the place and role of philosophical reflection in modern science in the context of its position in social development, its relations with man, culture, various spheres of social life.
Recommended books: 1. Petrushenko V.L. Filosofiia i metodolohiia nauky: Navchalnyi posibnyk. – Lviv: Vydavnytstvo Lvivskoi politekhniky, 2016. 2. Naukovyi svitohliad na zlami stolit / Lukianets V.S., Kravchenko O.M., Ozadovska L.V. ta inshi. – K.: Vyd. PARAPAN, 2006. 3. Svitohliadni implikatsii nauky / Lukianets V.S., Kravchenko O.M., Ozadovska L.V. ta inshi. – K.: Vyd. PARAPAN, 2004. 4. Analytycheskaia fylosofyia: Yzbrannыe tekstы / Sost., vstup. st y komment. A.F.Hriaznova. – M.: Yzd-vo MHU, 1993. 5. Khrestomatiia z istorii yevropeiskoi filosofii : [navchalnyi posibnyk dlia samostiinoi roboty studentiv] / Pid zah. redaktsiieiu prof. V.L.Petrushenka. – Lviv: Novyi Svit-2000, 2013. 6. The 20 big questions in science. // Birch H., Stuart C., Keat Looi M. // The Guardian. The Observer. 01.09.2013. 7. Losee John. A Historical Introduction to the Philosophy of Science. Fourth edition / John Losee. – New York: Oxford University Press, 2001. – 314 p. 8. Okasha Samir. Philosophy of Science. A Very Short Introduction / Samir Okasha. – Oxford, 2002. – 69 p. 9. http://www.osvita.org.ua/distance/articles/20/ 10. http://vu.net.ua 11. http://mz.com.ua 12. http://osvita.ua
Assessment methods and criteria: Methods of evaluation: oral answer, tests, writing tests and control-works, participation in the colloquium. Criteria for evaluating students for oral quests answers at seminars 1. Students receive 5 points for full disclosure of the content of the given questions for demonstration the ability to use the teaching material and support their knowledge with the help of example; 2. 4 points students receive for the correct explanation of not all but the basic statement for answering to the certain questions and the ability to make logical connections between them; 3. 3 points students receive for an incomplete, but correct answer to the questions asked, showing the problem of handling the material of the answer and uncertainty in accessing specific examples or explanations; 4. 3 points students can get for the appropriate and successful addition to the answers of other students or for the correct resolution of problem issues and tasks; 5. 2 points students receive for the correct addition to the speeches of other students at the seminar and for successful questions and replies that allow to understand better of the discussed issues; 6. One point the students can get by explaining the content of certain terms, for knowing the surnames of the founders of certain ideas or philosophical teachings and directions, for correct orientation in the historical epochs of the development of science and philosophy. Criteria for assessing students' performance of test tasks Since the test tasks include 5 questions in their content, each correct answer to the question is evaluated in 1 point, together for the correct answers - 5 points. During the semester 2 - 3 tests are fulfilled, and the final score for their implementation is the average arithmetic sum of the marks of individual tests. Criteria for assessing students' compliance with written control work To prepare written control work, each student receives 2 questions (all questions are individual, that is, they are not repeated). Further answers to the questions posed are evaluated in the same way as oral answers at seminars. Criteria for evaluating student answers to the oral part of the exam. The oral part of the exam is intended for students in the following cases: - when the students' answers do not allow them to be judged satisfactorily; - when the points of the every-day and final control in the amount differ by 3 points or less lover the next assessment; - when the examination paper gives reason to consider the student's use of different ways to write off answers; - when there is a sharp difference between the results of the student's work in the semester and the results of writing the exam paper. The oral part of the exam can be evaluated at a maximum of 10 points, so the teacher can put the student 2 to 3 questions. The criteria for evaluating answers to these questions are the same as the criteria for evaluating oral answers at seminars. Criteria for evaluating the students 'answers at the colloquium. For complete and conscious students' answer to the colloquium's proposed questions, the assessment is presented on the following grounds: - knowledge of the content of the question - 5 points; - ability to apply argumentation, logical analysis, proof - 5 points; - ability to give examples to demonstrate the level of understanding of the content of questions - 5 points;