CONTENT Do not take this subject thinking that it focuses on the history of science, or on scientific debates. IT IS PRIMARILY A PHILOSOPHY SUBJECT, and you will largely be learning to read and write philosophical arguments. For example, Thagard argues that a theory which purports to be scientific is psuedoscientific if and only if - Proposition 1 - It has been less progressive than alternative theories over a long period of time, and faces many unsolved problems; but - Proposition 2 - The community of practitioners makes little attempt to develop the theory towards solutions… You might spend part of a tutorial or essay analysing each of these propositions, debating their validity, or applying them to specific topics in science. Put more simply, the content is generally very theoretical, very wordy and very dry! The course coordinator/main lecturer is also not a captivating speaker. Some of the guest lectures are more interesting e.g. string theory and evolutionary theory. But again, remember that you are not learning about string theory or evolutionary theory per se, but rather learning to draw on PHILOSOPHICAL PROPOSITIONS to argue whether string theory or evolutionary theory qualify as sciences. ASSESSMENT This is unfortunately one of those first-year subjects where the teaching team provide very little assessment guidance. There is no tutorial dedicated to preparing for the first essay, and there is no rubric. Instead, they essentially expect you to just give the first essay a go, and use the feedback from that essay to inform your final essay. They tend to mark the first essay more harshly and the final essay more generously. This is typical of many first-year subjects. They do this so that they can imply that the subject has improved your essay-writing skill over the course of the semester. You may want to reconsider taking this subject if you are not confident in essay-writing. If you must take this subject, I strongly encourage you to ask your tutor as many specific questions as possible around the assessments (and any feedback), so you can tailor your writing style to their subjective preferences. Also draw on the school’s philosophy essay writing guide. One positive about the subject is that there is a wide variety of essay topics to choose from, to the extent that you can skip lectures that do not relate to your chosen topics. The first three weeks of content is the only truly critical content that is relevant to all topics. OVERALL Since this is one of the few Arts Discovery subjects, there is a steady stream of enrollments, and therefore little motivation for staff to improve it. Unless you have a specific interest in PHILOSOPHY, are confident in essay-writing, and comfortable - on an interpersonal level - asking about and adapting to a tutor’s specific preferences, I would encourage you to avoid this subject.

Great subject that makes you more critical and open-minded about science. The subject examines topics like astrology, string theory, forensic evidence, and intelligent design — one topic per week, with lectures and well-selected readings that complement each other. There are more assessments than other typical subjects (which usually have 2 to 3 assessments with heavy percentages): you have to summarise four readings and write two short papers, which are good opportunities to garner points and boost your grade before the final essay. For the final essay, sample papers were given out as references. The available questions were quite broad so it gave you complete freedom to choose a direction you wanted to go in — could be good for some, but for those who prefer to work on essays with clear rubrics and recommended structures, it could be difficult. Overall, it’s an amazing subject but it does seem to lean more towards scientific philosophy than history.

Very pretty interesting but each week very different from the last which meant it felt very fragmented. Found I was able to skip some weeks where the topic didn't interest me without it affecting any assessments.

Wasn't the best of subjects. Readings weren't the most interesting.

The subject is a little vague and each week of the course feels a little self contained. The assessment during the semester is straightforward enough, though the final essay is a bit challenging in trying to draw together a semester of study that was a bit fragmented when taught.