Adds some quotes, clarifies, emphasizes some parts

Author: dbosk

course-proposal/contents.tex

@@ -67,6 +67,15 @@ \subsection{The origin of the problem}
   \end{example}
 \end{frame}
 
+\begin{frame}
+  \textcquote{SecurityAsAScience}{%
+    Unfalsifiable claims are common in security---and they, along with circular 
+    arguments, are used to justify many defensive measures \textelp{}
+    \textins{T}here are many ways to argue measures in, but no way to argue one 
+    out.
+  }
+\end{frame}
+
 
 \subsection{The goal}
 
@@ -77,7 +86,8 @@ \subsection{The goal}
 
         \pause
 
-      \item Where are the disputes and why?
+      \item Where are the disputes, philosophical problems and why?
+      \item What are the methods we use and why?
     \end{itemize}
   \end{block}
 \end{frame}
@@ -153,20 +163,26 @@ \subsection{Contents}
 \begin{frame}
   \begin{example}[Deductive inquiry]
     \begin{itemize}
-      \item What are the limitations?
-      \item Can this be science on its own?
-      \item Or does it require a combination of application and further study 
-        to form something scientific?
+      \item \enquote{What can deduction possibly say about reality?}
     \end{itemize}
   \end{example}
 
   \pause
 
   \begin{example}[Inductive/empirical inquiry]
     \begin{itemize}
-      \item What can induction possibly say about security?
+      \item \enquote{What can induction possibly say about security?}
     \end{itemize}
   \end{example}
+
+  \pause
+
+  \begin{remark}[To focus on]
+    \begin{itemize}
+      \item What are the limitations?
+      \item Do these require a combination to form a Science of Security?
+    \end{itemize}
+  \end{remark}
 \end{frame}
 
 \begin{frame}
@@ -233,11 +249,10 @@ \subsection{Contents}
 \begin{frame}[allowframebreaks]
   \begin{block}{Assessment}
     \begin{itemize}
-      \item Apply subfield methodology from bottom-up and top-down
-        insights to own paper.
+      \item Apply subfield methodology insights to own paper.
 
       \item Reflect on how this paper fits in the big picture of Security as a 
-        science.
+        Science.
 
       \item Discussion/reflection on limits of how scientific security research 
         can be; \eg provability versus complexity of actual systems,