An argument without an audience is pointless, and an argument without an arguer is no more than a potential set of sentences. In his response to my earlier paper (Hinton 2019) on the ability of argumentation theory to deal with… Read More ›
argumentation
More on Bad Social Science, Brian Martin
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 ›
Why We Should Come Off the Fence When Experts Disagree, Jean H.M. Wagemans
Martin Hinton in “Why the Fence Is the Seat of Reason When Experts Disagree” (2019) discusses the use of the theory of argument schemes and their associated critical questions in the situation when experts disagree about a certain matter. In… Read More ›
A Dialogue on a Paradigm Case of Bad Science, Alan Sokal
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 ›
Notes on the Rhetoric of Trolling, Part 2, Bernard Wills
Author Information: Bernard Wills, Memorial University of Newfoundland and Labrador. bwills@grenfell.mun.ca. Wills, Bernard. “Notes on the Rhetoric of Trolling.” Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 8, no. 5 (2019): 1-10. The pdf of the article gives specific page references. Due… Read More ›
Notes on the Rhetoric of Trolling, Part 1, Bernard Wills
Author Information: Bernard Wills, Memorial University of Newfoundland and Labrador. bwills@grenfell.mun.ca. Wills, Bernard. “Notes on the Rhetoric of Trolling.” Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 8, no. 5 (2019): 1-10. The pdf of the article gives specific page references. Due… Read More ›
Bad Social Science, Brian Martin
Author Information: Brian Martin, University of Wollongong, bmartin@uow.edu.au. Martin, Brian. “Bad Social Science.” Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 8, no. 3 (2019): 6-16. The pdf of the article gives specific page references. Shortlink: https://wp.me/p1Bfg0-47a Articles in this dialogue:… Read More ›
Weak Scientism: The Prosecution Rests, Bernard Wills
Author Information: Bernard Wills, Sir Wilfred Grenfell College (Memorial University), bwills@grenfell.mun.ca. Wills, Bernard. “Weak Scientism: The Prosecution Rests.” Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 7, no. 10 (2018): 31-36. The pdf of the article gives specific page references. Shortlink: https://wp.me/p1Bfg0-41T On… Read More ›
On the Limits of Any Scientism, Bernard Wills
Author Information: Bernard Wills, Memorial University of Newfoundland and Labrador, bwills@grenfell.mun.ca. Wills, Bernard. “On the Limits of Any Scientism.” Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 7, no. 7 (2018): 34-39. The pdf of the article gives specific page references. Shortlink: https://wp.me/p1Bfg0-3Zn See… Read More ›
More in Defense of Weak Scientism, Moti Mizrahi
Author information: Moti Mizrahi, Florida Institute of Technology, mmizrahi@fit.edu Mizrahi, Moti. “More in Defense of Weak Scientism: Another Reply to Brown.” Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 7, no. 4 (2018): 7-25. The pdf of the article gives specific page references. Shortlink: https://wp.me/p1Bfg0-3W1… Read More ›