Dr. Tena Thau

This course is available on the MSc in Economics and Philosophy, MSc in Philosophy and Public Policy, MSc in Philosophy of Science and MSc in Philosophy of the Social Sciences. This course is available with permission as an outside option to students on other programmes where regulations permit.

The first part of the course will draw on the philosophy of science. We will explore how experts do and should, or should not, use their own value judgements in deciding what scientific research to put forward to policy makers.

The second part of the course, drawing on epistemology, will explore questions related to “higher-order” evidence. For example, how should we revise our beliefs in light of disagreement by an “epistemic peer”? When should we defer to the judgements of experts? And when experts disagree with each other, how should non-experts decide who to believe?

The final part of the course, drawing on ethics, will consider what moral principles should guide the policies we support.  Should policymakers seek to implement those policies that maximize the subjective wellbeing of the population? Do considerations of opportunity cost render suboptimal policies immoral?  And how should the welfare of future generations be taken into account?

Topics will be connected to current and pressing policy debates, including around prison reform, military spending, and the pandemic.

10 hours of lectures and 15 hours of seminars in the MT.

Students will be expected to produce 1 essay in the MT.

Christensen, D. (2014). “Disagreement and Public Controversy” in Lackey, J. (ed.) Essays in Collective Epistemology. Oxford University Press.

Douglas, H. (2009). Science, Policy, and the Value Free Ideal. University of Pittsburgh Press.

Hardwig, J. (1985). Epistemic Dependence. The Journal of Philosophy.

Schenwar, M. & Law, V. (2021). Prison by Any Other Name: The Harmful Consequences of Popular Reforms. New Press.

Thoma, J. (2022). Weighing the Costs and Benefits of Public Policy: On the Dangers of Single Metric Accounting. LSE Public Policy Review.

Essay (33%, 2000 words) and take-home assessment (67%) in January.