There’s a certain pleasure in accounts that debunk some of our most highly prized traits, especially when they’re seen to stem from science. Scientists and those who see themselves as scientifically minded often tell us that science shows that free… Read More ›
In “The Possibility of Epistemic Nudging” (2021), I address a phenomenon that is widely neglected in the current literature on nudges: intentional doxastic nudging, i.e. people’s intentional influence over other people’s beliefs, rather than over their choices. I argue that,… Read More ›
Steve Fuller’s work on transhumanism is interesting because it forces us to think about the long-term trajectory of the human species and the knowledge and technology it is likely to build in the future. He is surely right that the… Read More ›
Zombie movies express for us the horror that would take place if the dead did not go away so that the living could pursue existence unimpeded by the dead hand of history. The horror is an inversion of the desire… Read More ›
In their paper, Parviainen, Kosiki, and Torkkola (2021) take as their point of departure the epistemic paradox of the need for scientific knowledge for evidence-based political decision-making in situations when science has no answers. This ties in with the observation… Read More ›
What is striking as you turn the final page of Steve Fuller’s (2020) A Player’s Guide to the Post-Truth Condition: The Name of the Game, is the enormous ‘weight’ of the text despite its slim one-hundred and forty pages. Without… Read More ›
When writing my last review of the prequel to this latest book by Steve Fuller, Post-Truth: Knowledge as a Power Game (2018), I was on the Greek Island of Zakynthos. I said what a surreal experience that was, as we… Read More ›
I am grateful for Jonathan Matheson’s recent review (Matheson 2020) of my book, Disagreement, Deference, and Religious Commitment (Pittard 2019). Matheson’s excellent summary reflects a very careful reading, and his critical commentary offers important objections that deserve reflection and response…. 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 ›
Vicki Macknight and Fabien Medvecky’s “(Google-)Knowing Economics” (Social Epistemology 34, 3) raises many interesting questions. What does it mean to know in the digital age? Or, more specifically, what does it mean to know when the main source of knowledge… Read More ›