What is knowledge? can we justify our beliefs, and how? If a reality independent form the subject exists, can we know it, and to what extent? What is the cognitive value of theoretical science? What have been the main contributions on these arguments by classical and contemporary philosophers? How can we formalize our conceptions of knowledge and discuss their problems?? Which canons of rationality can we follow as guidance in our practical decisions?

While discussing these arguments the course will provide a brief general introduction to the philosophy of knowledge and decisions.

This work will help students to improve their logico-analytic and dialectic abilities, their philosophical sensibility, and the mastership of concepts and contents from the history of philosophy they have acquired in their bachelor program.

There are no pre-requisites for this course, but because of the rather abstract and rigorous character of its topics, it is advisable to attend classes regularly and actively, since the very beginning. Those unable to attend classes can study on their own the texts listed in the section below for non-attending students, but this will require careful work and a good attitude to autonomous learning, analysis and abstract thought.

 Non-Italian students will also be allowed to use English (or French or Spanish) for all their required readings, questions and comments in the classroom, and the final exam.

(A) Knowledge, its sources and its varieties.

(B) What can we know and how? Epistemology from the Classics to now: Plato and the rationalists; Aristotle; modern empiricism and its problems;  Kant; idealism; logical empiricism; phenomenism and verificationism; the philosophy of science in the XX Century.

(C) A contemporary perspective: the rationality of science; the role of universals; experience and the a priori; subjectivity and objectivity in knowledge

(D) Knowledge as true justified belief. Gettier’s paradox and its possible solutions. The nature of justification: foundationalism, coherentism, internism and externism. What is truth. Mental experiments.

(E) The skeptical challenge, and how to resist it. Skeptical sceneries and anti-skeptical strategies in history. Where the skeptics are right and where they are wrong.  How is knowledge possible: fallible but justified beliefs.

(F) Scientific realism and the skepticvism on the unobservable objects of theories. the empirical underdetermination of theories and the pessimistic meta-induction. The inference to the best explanation and the “no miracle argument”. Selective realisms. Deployment realism.

(G) Basic elements of decision theory and theory of social choices

There are no strict pre-requisites for this course, but the parts on philosophy of knowledge of a high school handbook of history of philosophy might provide a useful background

The course presupposes at least basic abilities of analysis of philosophical texts and abstract reasoning

Knowledge and understanding:

After the course students should be able to understand and explain philosophical texts of medium difficulty, discuss some of the classical problems in philosophy of knowledge, epistemology, metaphysics, epistemic logic, and theory of choices. They should be able to use the bibliographical tools and repertories available in this field, and know some of the state of the art questions on the theory of knowledge and scientific and metaphysical realism.

 Applying knowledge and understanding:

After the course students should be able to discuss and evaluate various claims and arguments both in the specialistic debate and in the general contemporary cultural debate.--

 Making judgements:

After the course students should be able to make autonomous and original judgements about the arguments in the debate and  the examples drawn from both ordinary and scientific knowledge. To this end discussions in the classroom will be encouraged. Originality and autonomous judgement will be part of the final evalution of the student's performance. ---

 Communication skills: 

After the course students should be able to explain and discuss the relevant topics with conceptual and linguistic exactness, and to offer efficacious  and synthetic accounts of the subject matter. To this end, they should acquire an at least medium level lexical competence in philosophy of knoewledge. In order to achieve these results verbal interaction in the classroom and a careful reading and analysis of the relevant texts will be encouraged. ---

 Learning skills: 

After the course students should be acquainted with the subject matter and the method of research enough to be able to proceed on their own  in gathering further knowledge from the literature in the field and in contiguous fields. To this end they should also improve their ability to read English texts in the field.

The teaching material prepared by the lecturer in addition to recommended textbooks (such as for instance slides, lecture notes, exercises, bibliography) and communications from the lecturer specific to the course can be found inside the Moodle platform › blended.uniurb.it

Some complementary lectures will be given by  researchers specialist in the theory of knowledge and decision theory. The materials available for the course, all communications from the teacher, and any other further actvities can be found on the web platform Moodle › https://blended.uniurb.it

Teaching

Classroom lectures offering general frameworks, analyses of particular topics, and comments to the relevant literature. Before, during and after the lecture questions, comments and discussions by the students are encouraged. Of course personal study at home will be equally important. the students are expected to study the texts assigned each time, in order to be able to ask questions and discuss them at the next meeting.

Attendance

Students should attend classes regularly and actively, since the very beginning. Because of the analytic and often abstract character of the subject matter, active participation in classroom discussion will be very useful. In order to do that, and in general to follow the lectures successfully, it is strongly advised to do every day the homework suggested as preparation for the following lecture

Course books

 (A) La conoscenza, le sue fonti, le sue varietà.

1. Platone, Teeteto 163-165, XVIII-XX; 184b-187b, XXIX-XXX; 200D-2001D, XXXVIII; 206c-210a, XLII-XLIV.

2. Platone, Menone (97d-98b, XXXIX).

(B) cosa possiamo conoscere e come? La riflessione epistemologica dai classici a oggi

3. Galileo, dal Saggiatore: il calore e le proprietà soggettive

4. Cartesio, Meditazioni metafisiche I, II, IV (pp. 228-229). -

5. Cartesio, Discorso sul metodo IV (pp. 154-159).

6. Berkeley, da: Trattato sui princìpi della conoscenza umana (pp. 450-453).

7. Berkeley, da: Dialoghi tra Hylas e Philonous I §§ 1-8 (pp. 453-461).

8. Kant, Critica della Ragion Pura, B xx, 59-60.

9. Duhem, passi da La teoria fisica, il suo oggetto e la sua struttura.

10. Carnap, Pseudoproblemi nella filosofia, § 9-10.

11. B. Russell, I problemi della filosofia, capitoli 1, 2.

12. K. Popper, Logica della scoperta scientifica cap. I, §§ 1-6, Conoscenza oggettiva, cap. V. (actually the pages uploaded on the Blending learning platform will be enough).

13. W.V. Quine, “Due dogmi dell’empirismo”, § 6  (in Quine, Da un punto di vista logico, Raffaello Cortina, o in Filosofia del Linguaggio, a cura di Casalegno e altri, Raffaello Cortina).

14. W.V. Quine: “Posizioni e realtà”, in I modi del Paradosso, Il Saggiatore, 1975, pp. 304-312.

15. N. Goodman, Fatti, ipotesi e previsioni, Laterza, pp. 84-86, 92-93.

16. J.L. Austin, Senso e sensibilia,  pp. 31-33, 42-43, 112-113.

17. T. Kuhn La struttura delle rivoluzioni scientifiche, Cap. 10 (139-41, 144-5, 147-50, 151, 153-156).

18. A. Musgrave, Senso comune, scienza, scetticismo, Cortina Editore 1995.

(C) Una prospettiva contemporanea

19. M. Alai Modi di conoscere il mondo, Angeli 1994.

20. M. Alai,   “Realismo, idealismo e agnosticismo. Una prospettiva epistemologica”, Hermeneutica (Nuova Serie) 2014, pp. 109-126.

21. M. Alai “The Metaphysical Scope of the New Realism: Confronting Eco’s and Parrini’s Strictures”, in L. Taddio (cur.), New Perspectives on Realism, Mimesis International, Milano 2017, pp. 9-31.

(D) Teoria della conoscenza ed esperimenti mentali

22. E. Gettier, “La credenza vera e giustificata è conoscenza?”, nel vol. n. 31, pp. 37-40 (oppure in A. Bottani, C. Penco (cur.) Significato e teorie del linguaggio, Franco Angeli 1991).

23. T. Piazza Che cos'è la conoscenza Carocci

24. A. Pagnini, Teoria della conoscenza, TEA, 1997 (anche in P. Rossi (cur.), La filosofia UTET, 1995, vol. III, pp. 109-185).

25. N. Vassallo, Teoria della conoscenza, Laterza 2003.

26. C. Calabi, A. Coliva, A. Sereni, G. Volpe (a cura di) Teorie della conoscenza, Cortina 2015.

27. M. Alai,   “Conoscenza, verità, giustificazione epistemica”, in La certezza della verità. Il sistema della logica aletica e il procedimento della giustificazione epistemica (Sensus Communis. International Yearbook for Studies on Alethic Logic, 18), a cura di A. Livi, Editrice Leonardo da Vinci, Roma 2013, pp. 31-46. -

28.  M. Alai,   “Regimenting Common Sense Concepts of Knowledge and Justification after Gettier”, in:  The Epistemology of Ordinary Knowledge, a cura di M. Bianca e P. Piccari, Mimesis 2016.

29. D.  Pritchard,What is this thing called Knowledge? Routledge 2014.

30. Angelucci, A. Che cos’è un esperimento mentale? Carocci 2018.

(E) La sfida scettica e come resisterle

31. M. Alai, La sfida scettica e come affrontarla, Nuova Secondaria 2018, e-book

(F) Il realismo scientifico

32. C. Gabbani, Realismo e antirealismo scientifico, ETS 2018

33. M. Alai, “Van Fraassen, Observability and Belief”, in M. D'Agostino, G. Giorello, F. Laudisa, T. Pievani and C. Sinigaglia (eds.) New Essays in Logic and Philosophy of Science, SILFS vol. I, College Publications, London 2010.

34. M. Alai, “Ontologia, conoscenza e significato nel realismo scientifico” in Ontologia, realtà e conoscenza, a cura di M. Bianca e P. Piccari, Mimesis, Milano, 2013, pp. 119-144.

35. M. Alai, “The Debates on Scientific Realism Today: Knowledge and Objectivity in Science” in: E. Agazzi (ed.) Varieties of Scientific Realism. Objectivity and Truth in Science, Springer, Cham etc., 2017, pp. 19-47

 (G) Elementi di teoria delle decisioni

36. D.M. Resnik, Scelte. Introduzione alla teoria delle decisioni, Muzzio 1990.

 The following can provide clearer or more in-depth understanding of some topics:

39. Biblioteca analitica: i testi fondamentali, a cura di G. Bonino, C. Gabbani, P. Tripodi, Carocci 2020, chs. 2, 6, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 16, 23, 24, 29, 32.

Only texts n. 1-17, 22, 30, 31, and n. 36 (pp. 1-96) will be required at the exam.  Non-attending students will also need n. 18. Everything else may be useful for a deeper approach to the subject, and some suggestions will be offered during classes. Many of these texts will be made available on the blended learning site of the course (among them some parts from out-of-print books). The articles by M. Alai can be requested to him. An English edition can be used whenever existing, and the texts in Italian can be substituted by English equivalents by agreement with the teacher. For any problem or question please contact the teacher.

Assessment

There will be a mid-term partial exam consisting of 4 open questions, one of which may be substituted  by a second-choice question. For the final examination  students will choose between a written examination at the early pre-exam session and an oral examination at the regular exam sessions. The written exam will consist of 8 open questions, two of which can be substituted by second-choice questions. The mid-term exam will weight 1/3 in the final evaluation and the final exam will weight 2/3.

The written exams allow a comparative and more objective assessment of the students’ learning, while testing the capacities for reflection, writing and argumentation. However the option to choose instead the oral examination allows even the students less familiar with written examinations to seek a good final mark. Second-choice questions prevent the risk of picking just one of the few gaps in the student's knowledge. 

Both the written and the oral exam are intended to ascertain not only what and how much the students have learned both about the basic concepts of the discipline and its most important historical developments, but also their comprehension, the acquisition of better attitudes to  analysis, exposition, analytic argumentation,  and of the capacity to discuss in a critical and possibly original way the topics of classes and assigned readings.

All of these criteria will have equal weight in the assessment, but the minimal basis, sufficient to pass the course, will be a sufficiently clear exposition of the basic concepts and contents. Each question of the written exam will be marked from 1 to 10, according to the described criteria. Then the average of the four questions will be expressed on a scale of 1 to 30, making sure that the best students can in any case receive satisfactory marks, and the different levels of performance are adequately distinguished. The curve helps to make up for the contingent factors which can affect the average performance of the students in one academic year with respect to students of other years, or of the students of this course with respect to other courses, thus seeking diachronically and synchronically uniform standards for all students.

In the oral examination two or three open questions will be asked, followed by further questions if needed to achieve a more precise and reliable evaluation. Each answer will be graded from 1 to 30 according to the above criteria and the considerations guiding the curvature of the written exam. The final grade will then be the average of partial grades. Active participation in class discussion will also weight in the assessment, contributing to the choice of the curve and to decide the grade in case of uncertainties between a higher or lower grade. 

All and only all topics actually discusses in classes and the texts explicitly indicated during classes will be required for the exam.  All the other texts can be used for a better and deeper understanding.

Foreign students will have an option to take the exam in English (or French, or Spanish).

Disabilità e DSA

Le studentesse e gli studenti che hanno registrato la certificazione di disabilità o la certificazione di DSA presso l'Ufficio Inclusione e diritto allo studio, possono chiedere di utilizzare le mappe concettuali (per parole chiave) durante la prova di esame.

A tal fine, è necessario inviare le mappe, due settimane prima dell’appello di esame, alla o al docente del corso, che ne verificherà la coerenza con le indicazioni delle linee guida di ateneo e potrà chiederne la modifica.

Teaching

Those unable to attend classes will study on their own (individually or with others) according to the directions of this vademecum and if possible with the help which can be given by the teacher during office hours or through e-mail, Skype, etc. The files of lecture notes will also be made available on the platform Moodle › https://blended.uniurb.it.

Attendance

In order to make up for the impossibility of attending classes, a hard and careful study is required. One should already possess good skills of autonomous learning and some capacity to read and understand philosophical texts, at least at a basic level. Whenever possible, it is advisable to work with other students. Students should also test their own learning by trying to produce examples of each concept and idea they encounter. Lists of test questions or mock exams will also be supplied upon request.

To make learning more interactive students are welcome to agree with the instructure on the topic of a short essay which will be handed in at least one week before the exam.

Course books

(A) Required readings:

Texts n. 1-18, 22, 30, 31, and n. 36 (pp. 1-96) (listed above for attendiong students).

All the other readings suggested for students attending classes.

An English edition can be used whenever existing, and the texts in Italian can be substituted by English equivalents by agreement with the teacher.

Assessment

Oral examination. Alternatively, subject to previous agreement with the teacher, it will be possible to take a written examination at the early pre-exam session. Both the oral and the written examination have the same aims and characters  described for attending students.  Students may ask the teacher to write a term paper on a topic relevant to the course. In this case the paper will weight in the final evaluation approximately as a single question.  Foreign students may ask to take the exam in English (or French, or Spanish)

Disabilità e DSA

Le studentesse e gli studenti che hanno registrato la certificazione di disabilità o la certificazione di DSA presso l'Ufficio Inclusione e diritto allo studio, possono chiedere di utilizzare le mappe concettuali (per parole chiave) durante la prova di esame.

A tal fine, è necessario inviare le mappe, due settimane prima dell’appello di esame, alla o al docente del corso, che ne verificherà la coerenza con le indicazioni delle linee guida di ateneo e potrà chiederne la modifica.