Abstract In a reply to Mizrahi (2019), Bryant (2020) raises several methodological concerns regarding my attempt to test hypotheses about the observation that academic philosophers tend to find “scientism” threatening empirically using quantitative, corpus-based methods. Chief among her methodological concerns… Read More ›
naturalism
Some Devils in the Details: Methodological Concerns Regarding Mizrahi’s “The Scientism Debate”, Amanda Bryant
“The Scientism Debate” in Summary In his article “The Scientism Debate: A Battle for the Soul of Philosophy?” (2019), Moti Mizrahi sets out to empirically test two hypotheses that putatively explain why philosophers find scientism threatening. The hypotheses are: H1:… Read More ›
Response to Mark Coeckelbergh’s Review of Transhumanism, Nature, and the Ends of Science, Robert Frodeman
The original title of the book was On Limit. My editor resisted the title; it wasn’t searchable, you know. But this remains the book’s central theme. I see the play of infinity and limit as the central dynamic of our… Read More ›
Heidegger Today, Paolo Palladino
Author Information: Paolo Palladino, Lancaster University, p.palladino@lancaster.ac.uk Palladino, Paolo. “Heidegger Today: On Jeff Kochan’s Science and Social Existence.” Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 7, no. 8 (2018): 41-46. The pdf of the article gives specific page references. Shortlink: https://wp.me/p1Bfg0-40b I have… Read More ›
Philosophy Out in the Cold, Sheldon Richmond
Author Information: Sheldon Richmond, Independent Researcher Richmond, Sheldon. “Philosophy Out in the Cold.” Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 7, no. 4 (2018): 33-40. The pdf of the article gives specific page references: Shortlink: https://wp.me/p1Bfg0-3Wi John McCumber’s book, The Philosophy Scare:… Read More ›
Context and Naturalism in Social Epistemology, Lyudmila A. Markova
Author Information: Lyudmila A. Markova, Russian Academy of Sciences, Markova.lyudmila2013@yandex.ru Markova, Lyudmila A. 2013.”Context and Naturalism in Social Epistemology.” Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 2 (9): 33-35. The PDF of the article gives specific page numbers. Shortlink: http://wp.me/p1Bfg0-XC Please… Read More ›
Reply to Rockmore, Ilya Kasavin
Author Information: Ilya Kasavin, Russian Academy of Sciences, itkasavin@gmail.com, Ilya Kasavin: Website Kasavin, Ilya. 2013. “Reply to Rockmore.” Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 2 (2): 26-29. The PDF of the article gives specific page numbers. Shortlink: http://wp.me/p1Bfg0-FK Please refer… Read More ›
Kasavin on Social Epistemology and Naturalism: A Critical Reply, Tom Rockmore
Author Information: Tom Rockmore, Duquesne University, Institute of Foreign Philosophy, Peking University, rockmore@duq.edu Rockmore, Tom. 2013. “Kasavin on Social Epistemology and Naturalism: A Critical Reply.” Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 2 (2): 8-11. The PDF of the article gives… Read More ›