Philosophy · 3rd Year · Philosophy of Knowledge · 2.º Período

Knowledge in the Digital Age

Students apply epistemological concepts to modern issues like fake news, artificial intelligence, and information overload. They critically evaluate digital sources of information.

TL;DR:This topic examines the boundaries of what can be known through the scientific method and pure reason. Students explore the 'demarcation problem', what separates science from non-science, and consider questions of value, purpose, and aesthetics that science may not be equipped to answer. This aligns with NCCA Philosophy LO 2.4 and supports the Junior Cycle 'Nature of Science' strand.

• NCCA Curriculum Specifications
• NCCA Philosophy LO 2.5: Apply philosophical questioning to contemporary media and information.
• NCCA Philosophy LO 2.6: Evaluate the impact of technology on human knowledge and understanding.

About This Topic

This topic examines the boundaries of what can be known through the scientific method and pure reason. Students explore the 'demarcation problem', what separates science from non-science, and consider questions of value, purpose, and aesthetics that science may not be equipped to answer. This aligns with NCCA Philosophy LO 2.4 and supports the Junior Cycle 'Nature of Science' strand.

In a world increasingly driven by data and technology, understanding the limits of these tools is crucial for ethical citizenship. Students consider alternative ways of knowing, such as emotional intelligence or cultural wisdom. This topic thrives when students engage in collaborative investigations into 'unsolvable' problems, determining which tools (science, art, or philosophy) are best suited to tackle them.

Key Questions

1. How does the internet change how we acquire knowledge?
2. What makes a digital source of information reliable?
3. Can artificial intelligence possess true knowledge?

Watch Out for These Misconceptions

Common Misconception

If science can't prove it, it's not true.

What to Teach Instead

Many things (like mathematical truths or moral values) aren't 'proven' by science but are still considered true. Using 'Category Sorting' helps students see that different types of truth require different types of proof.

Common Misconception

Philosophy and Science are enemies.

What to Teach Instead

Science actually began as 'Natural Philosophy'. Peer-teaching the history of thinkers like Newton helps students see that philosophy provides the logical framework that science uses to operate.

Active Learning Ideas

Inquiry Circle

The Tool Box

Groups are given 'problems' like 'How do I cure cancer?' and 'Is this painting beautiful?'. They must decide which 'tools' (Scientific Method, Logic, Intuition, Tradition) are appropriate for each and explain why some tools fail in certain areas.

40 min·Small Groups

Formal Debate

Can Science Explain Love?

One side argues that love is purely chemical and biological (reductionism), while the other argues that the 'experience' of love cannot be captured by data. Students must use specific examples to support their claims.

45 min·Whole Class

Think-Pair-Share

The Unprovable Truth

Students try to think of one thing they believe is true but cannot be proven by a laboratory experiment. They share with a partner to see if their partner can find a way to 'test' it scientifically.

20 min·Pairs

Frequently Asked Questions

What is 'Scientism'?

Scientism is the belief that the scientific method is the only way to reach truth. In philosophy class, we challenge this by looking at ethics, logic, and aesthetics, areas where science can provide data but not necessarily 'meaning' or 'value'.

How does this connect to the Irish 'Nature of Science' strand?

It directly supports the 'Science in Society' element. It helps students understand that science is a human endeavor with specific strengths and limitations, which is a key part of the Junior Cycle Science specification.

How can active learning help students understand the limits of reason?

Active learning puts students in the position of the researcher. By attempting to 'solve' a moral dilemma using only scientific facts, students quickly encounter a 'wall'. This experience of frustration is more educational than being told science has limits; they feel the limits as they try to apply data to a question of 'should' or 'ought'.

Is this topic anti-science?

Not at all. It is 'pro-clarity'. By understanding what science *cannot* do, we actually respect and value what it *can* do much more effectively. It prevents us from misusing scientific authority in areas where it doesn't apply.