1. Essay 2 Science Social beliefs, values, background beliefs Topic 2: Auxiliary assumptions Background theory Paradigm Topic 3: Theory shaping observation Topic 3: How science affects our views Topic 3: how social beliefs can affect science Social beliefs, values, background beliefs If H, then I

2. Essay 2 Part 1: Identify the players/science/period Identify the hypothesis being proposed and tested Identify the methods used to test the hypothesis Identify the conclusion(s) reached

3. Essay 2 Part 2:  Either use what we’ve learned about the role of auxiliary assumptions, and/or (background theory), and/or a paradigm to identify/describe what the scientists assumed/believed… these include both scientific assumptions/methods and social beliefs (use Gould to identify them)  Or choose to focus on how theory shapes observations in the case you on which you focus…

4. Part 3: In each essay, Gould draws one or two lessons. Whichever essay you focus on, identify a lesson and use what you did in part 2 (the role of auxiliary assumptions, background theory, paradigm and/or theory shaping observations) to evaluate his argument.

5. Ethics and science The case of “Genie” The scientific questions: Are humans born with an innate capacity for language (syntax) or is behaviorism correct? Noam Chomsky: Yes, they are so equipped (Linguist at Harvard, 1950s and 60s) If so, is there a “critical window” for language acquisition, after a child has passed through it without language it becomes difficult or impossible to acquire one? Yes, there is a critical window (1960s) A child’s ability to acquire language is at its peak between birth and 7, and then declines

6. The case of “Genie” The case of “Genie,” a “natural experiment”: Scientific questions: Deprived of language through puberty, can she nevertheless be taught and acquire language? The players: “Genie” and the team of scientists and medical doctors who work with/live with/treat her Susan Curtis, the grad student in linguistics who tries to teach her language Jean Butler, a social worker to whom Genie was first assigned… and eventually taken from

7. The case of “Genie” The players: “Genie” and the team of scientists and medical doctors who work with/live with/treat her James Kent: a psychiatrist David Rigler: a psychologist Marilyn Rigler: live in teacher The National Institutes for Mental Health

8. The case of “Genie” The case of “Genie,” a “natural experiment”: Scientific questions: Deprived of language through puberty, can she nevertheless be taught and acquire language? What ethical issues emerge in the study/treatment of Genie? How should human and/or any other cognitively aware animal be treated? Is knowledge a good for its own sake? Should ethical concerns or issues limit/shape scientific research?

9. What is this thing called science?