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: 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 ›
Author Information: Nuria Anaya-Reig, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, nuria.anaya@urjc.es. Anaya-Reig, Nuria. “Teorías Implícitas del Investigador: Un Campo por Explorar Desde la Psicología de la Ciencia.” Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 7, no. 11 (2018): 36-41. The pdf of the article gives… Read More ›
Author Information: Moti Mizrahi, Florida Institute of Technology, mmizrahi@fit.edu. Mizrahi, Moti. “Why Scientific Knowledge Is Still the Best.” Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 7, no. 9 (2018): 18-32. The pdf of the article gives specific page references. Shortlink: https://wp.me/p1Bfg0-40I For context,… Read More ›
Author Information: Tereza Stöckelová, Institute of Sociology, Czech Academy of Sciences, tereza.stockelova@soc.cas.cz Stöckelová, Tereza. “Unspoken Complicity: Further Comments on Castellani, Pontecorvo and Valente and Rip.” Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 4, no. 2 (2015): 17-20. The PDF of the… Read More ›