In “Bad Social Science,” (2019) I pointed to the phenomenon of non-specialists in the social science domain making claims that fall very far short of what social scientists consider best practice. I identified “several facets of bad social science: ad… Read More ›
Author Information: Alan Sokal, New York University, sokal@nyu.edu. Sokal, Alan. “A Dialogue on a Paradigm Case of Bad Science: Comment on Brian Martin.” Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 8, no. 5 (2019): 36-47. The pdf of the article gives… Read More ›
Author Information: Susan Dieleman, University of Southern Illinois, Edwardsville, sdielem@siue.edu. Dieleman, Susan. “Against Ideal Theory Ignorance.” Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 9, no. 5 (2019): 11-15. The pdf of the article gives specific page references. Shortlink: https://wp.me/p1Bfg0-48M Daniel… Read More ›
Author Information: Mirko Farina, King’s College London, mirko.farina@kcl.ac.uk. Farina, Mirko. “Exploring the Concepts of Science in 166 Pages: Reviewing Nigel Sanitt.” Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 8, no. 4 (2019): 28-33. The pdf of the article gives specific page… Read More ›
As a scientific realist, Seungbae Park in his (2019) paper “The Disastrous Implications of the ‘English’ View of Rationality in a Social World” seeks to repel an anti-realist attack from Bas Van Fraassen by turning his opponent’s new epistemology against… Read More ›
It is now fashionable to condemn our species’ exalted self-regard for precipitating that apocalypse in waiting known as the ‘Anthropocene’. Nevertheless, I shall heretically argue that we really know more than we normally think we do. But I don’t mean… Read More ›
Gasparin, Schinckus, & Green (2019) discuss a stimulating idea regarding financial flash crashes: regulators based their decisions on a framework inherited from the financial economics mainstream, while its models and theories haven’t demonstrated their capability to forecast and prevent such… Read More ›
I have been thinking and writing about scientism for a few years now (since my (2017a) and most recently, an entry on scientism for the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy), but I continue to be taken aback by the ferociousness of… Read More ›
Does America Need More Innovators? is comprised of fifteen contributions about innovation, innovators, and innovation programs in America. The contributions are organized in three sections: Champions, Critics, and Reformers. The diverse perspectives offer a balanced and rich examination and reflection… Read More ›
I want you to picture Bruno Latour on a tightrope. He is way up there near the top of the big circus tent. You will need binoculars to see his face, the sweat on his straining brow. All necks are… Read More ›
Bruno Latour’s Down to Earth is, functionally, a call to rethink and re-describe our political reality in accordance with the changing forces that shape it. Latour lays out his argument in 20 brief sections, each deceptively quick to read. Section… Read More ›
Wagner-Egger et al. still argue that public doubts and conspiratorial concerns represent a mass pathology in need of a mass psychological cure. This is known as the “pathologizing project”. I acknowledge the soundness of M R.X. Dentith’s analytical critique of… Read More ›
In Vices of the Mind, Cassam provides an accessible, engaging, and timely introduction to the nature of epistemic vices and what we can do about them. Cassam provides an account of epistemic vices and explores three broad types of epistemic… Read More ›
The historian and political activist Walter Rodney and the novelist and poet Wilson Harris are not often set in conversation with each other. Yet despite their very different disciplinary backgrounds and the great disparities in their approach to politics, Rodney… Read More ›
