Critical Replies are engagements with articles recently published in Social Epistemology.
Imagine a philosopher steeped in scholasticism reacting to the Newtonian world picture: Newton’s Principia Mathematica, illustrates what can happen when one doesn’t really reflect on the foundations of what one is thinking and claiming …[please read below the rest of… Read More ›
The imaginary has recently re-emerged as a central problem in social theory and—in various guises—as a subject of major interest of research conducted in the various sub-branches of the social sciences. It is early days yet to decide if we… Read More ›
“Boundary work” refers to the practice of establishing and defining research areas, which in part involves locating research questions or topics within particular disciplines. As a consequence, boundary work also involves practices that put boundaries around ourselves as researchers of… Read More ›
In their impressive article, “Collective Belief Defended,” Michael G. Bruno and J. M. Fritzman argue “that there are no fundamental obstacles to ontologically countenancing conscious cognitive collectives” (Bruno and Fritzman 2020, 1) … [please read below the rest of the… Read More ›
I extend thanks to Inna Kouper for her response to “(Google-) Knowing Economics”, which I co-authored with Fabien Medvekcy. The points she raises are fascinating and important, as is this whole area of study. How we come to know with… Read More ›
Brian Singer’s (2020) commentary on “Conceptualizing the Modern Imaginary” (a special issue of Social Epistemology) invites further reflection on the discussion among the contributors. I welcome this opportunity. Many concerns with which I have great sympathy are raised in the… Read More ›
We enter this conversation precisely to continue this productive exchange on the lessons to be learned from L’Aquila, grounding our response to both DeVasto and Felbacher-Escamilla on our previous work about the same case published in 2019 in Rhetoric &… Read More ›
I would like to thank Faruk Aksoy (2020) for his thoughtful, clear-sighted and generous engagement with my paper “Epistemic Barriers to Rational Voting: The Case of European Parliament Elections” (2020). In this short piece, I want to respond to the… Read More ›
This post is a rejoinder to Charles Lassister’s response (2020) to my article “How Not to Deal with the Tragic Dilemma.” A discussion of how to navigate a social world structured by racism is, unfortunately, timely … [please read below… Read More ›
Weber’s is an investigation into the nature of the scientist’s calling or vocation, given the disenchantment of the world. Weber notes what most of the students in his audience already appreciate—that this disenchantment necessarily precludes historically influential characterizations of the… Read More ›