Chevron Left
Retour à Philosophy, Science and Religion: Science and Philosophy

Avis et commentaires pour d'étudiants pour Philosophy, Science and Religion: Science and Philosophy par Université d'Édimbourg

4.5
étoiles
825 évaluations
226 avis

À propos du cours

Philosophy, Science and Religion mark three of the most fundamental modes of thinking about the world and our place in it. Are these modes incompatible? Put another way: is the intellectually responsible thing to do to ‘pick sides’ and identify with one of these approaches at the exclusion of others? Or, are they complementary or mutually supportive? As is typical of questions of such magnitude, the devil is in the details. For example, it is important to work out what is really distinctive about each of these ways of inquiring about the world. In order to gain some clarity here, we’ll be investigating what some of the current leading thinkers in philosophy, science and religion are actually doing. This course, entitled ‘Science and Philosophy’, is the first of three related courses in our Philosophy, Science and Religion Online series. The first launch is now closed to enrolments. We will launch a new version of the course in July 2018. The course will address four themes each presented by guest lecturers: 1. Are Science and Religion in conflict? (Professor Michael Murray, Franklin & Marshall) 2. Neuroscience and Free Will (Professor Al Mele, Florida State) 3. Creationism and Evolutionary Biology--Science or Pseudo-science? (Dr. Mark Harris and Dr. David de Pomerai, University of Edinburgh) 4. Do Scientific claims constitute absolute truths? (Professor Martin Kusch, University of Vienna) The second and third courses in the Philosophy, Science and Religion series are ‘Philosophy and Religion’ and ‘Religion and Science’. They may be taken in any order and completing all three courses will give you a broader understanding of this fascinating topic. Look for: • Philosophy, Science and Religion II: Philosophy and Religion • Philosophy, Science and Religion III: Religion and Science Check out our trailer to hear more: https://youtu.be/OifqTI5VKek You can also follow us on Twitter at https://twitter.com/EdiPhilOnline and you can follow the hashtag #psrmooc...

Meilleurs avis

SR
13 nov. 2017

A very interesting course and it has given a great knowleddge to me about the concept of science and religion . just amazed and the professors taught this in a very impressive way . very nyccc .

RR
13 mai 2017

Fine course, nice references for further reading, clear and nice instructors. Only two where a little odd: Statis Psillos, talking too fast, and Conor Cunningham, a bit too theatrical.

Filtrer par :

126 - 150 sur 224 Avis pour Philosophy, Science and Religion: Science and Philosophy

par Winston A W

28 nov. 2020

Excellent, thank you.

par Aakriti S

28 oct. 2020

it was a great course

par Carroll K

16 janv. 2022

v​ery imformative

par Jacob P

24 juil. 2017

Very interesting!

par Asif S B

18 avr. 2017

Brilliant course!

par louis f d m p s

20 févr. 2017

Very formative!!!

par Robin B

26 janv. 2017

Awesome course =)

par Karthik H

13 mai 2021

VERY NICE COURSE

par Andrii B

24 mai 2018

Very good course

par Ануфриева А А

29 janv. 2018

Great! Thank you

par NILMAR R N

23 mai 2019

excelente curso

par Ruben F

29 juil. 2020

Amazing course

par NEERAJ U G

17 juin 2020

awesome course

par David P

5 mai 2017

Great course !

par Laura O

28 janv. 2019

fun and easy

par Paccelli Z

14 nov. 2017

Excellent!

par nalany

25 févr. 2019

excelente

par René D N A

28 janv. 2019

muy bueno

par Dr H S

29 août 2017

Excellent

par Sergio G

4 sept. 2017

to do...

par Kaldybay K

10 août 2021

SUPER

par Gerardo L M

2 sept. 2020

Great

par John L M

3 mai 2020

To my surprise, the range of perspectives I found fairer than many who've reviewed this first course already have. I completed all three in the series in order. This starts off the sequence sensibly. Yet, the final portions with Dr de Pomerai were nothing more than cut and paste from the textbook, and chopped up as they were with no regard for explanations or assistance for non-biologists, the material was far too specialized for newcomers. Even if the other lecturers also delivered as it were their parts of the textbook on camera, they did not make it seem such. I add that those who somehow see this as propaganda for creationism or ID seem not to have accurately placed these portions in perspective. After all, in a course of this nature, why those controversies would be expected not to be addressed appears odd--anyone interested in the juxtaposition of the three fields has to study areas of conflict.

par Bob M

4 mai 2020

Generally very good. The speakers were knowledgeable, insightful for the most part engaging and the content very interesting. I enjoyed it a great deal.

My main criticisms would be:

In Week 2 Prof Mele dived straight into a discussion of experiments about ‘free will’ without a bit of preamble to make it clear that the concept of ‘free will’ is a lot more complicated than the average person appreciates.

In Week 5 Dr de Pomerai’s presentation on Evolutionary Biology was a dry as dust recitation of facts. It felt a bit like being read tracts from the Bible and I think really failed in the objective of establishing why Evolutionary Biology is a science. To do this you need to do more than recite what is believed, but delve a bit more into the hypotheses, the predictions, and the subsequent supporting evidence

par Natalie B

10 avr. 2020

The majority of this course was great, though the lecturers could have been more engaging. However my biggest issue with this course was the 5th week, where the final lecturer sounded like he was reciting from a biology textbook about evolution rather than actually discussing anything or making any claims relevant to philosophy or drawing comparisons to religion. Additionally, all the questions in the final section had completely subjective answers, I answered all of them without watching any lectures (though I do have a background in science) these questions could have been answered by a child.