Switch to: References

Citations of:

The dam project : who are the experts? : a philosophical lesson from the Vajont disaster

In Pierluigi Barrotta & Giovanni Scarafile (eds.), Science and democracy: controversies and conflicts. Philadelphia ;: John Benjamins (2018)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Public engagement and argumentation in science.Silvia Ivani & Catarina Dutilh Novaes - 2022 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 12 (3):1-29.
    Public engagement is one of the fundamental pillars of the European programme for research and innovation _Horizon 2020_. The programme encourages engagement that not only fosters science education and dissemination, but also promotes two-way dialogues between scientists and the public at various stages of research. Establishing such dialogues between different groups of societal actors is seen as crucial in order to attain epistemic as well as social desiderata at the intersection between science and society. However, whether these dialogues can actually (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Emotions and Distrust in Science.Katherine Furman - 2020 - International Journal of Philosophical Studies 28 (5):713-730.
    In our interactions with science, we are often vulnerable; we do not have complete control of the situation and there is a risk that we, or those we love, might be harmed. This is not an emotionall...
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Expertise, Relevance and Types of Knowledge.Pierluigi Barrotta & Eleonora Montuschi - 2018 - Social Epistemology 32 (6):387-396.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • X—Why Trust Science? Reliability, Particularity and the Tangle of Science.Nancy Cartwright - 2021 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 120 (3):237-252.
    In evaluating science, philosophers tends to focus on general laws and on their truth. I urge a shift in focus to the reliability of the panoply of outputs science produces and in tandem, from the general to the particular. Here I give five arguments to support this, including many, many scientific outputs, which must be supposed reliable if we are to warrant our general principles, aren’t truth-apt; and reliability invites the crucial question, ‘Reliable for what?’ Getting clear the particular purpose (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations