Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. (1 other version)Thinking the Unthinkable as a Radical Scientific Project.Steve Fuller - 2010 - Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society 22 (4):397-413.
    Philip Tetlock underestimates the import of his own Expert Political Judgment. It is much more than a critical scientific evaluation of the accuracy and consistency of political pundits. It also offers a blueprint for challenging expertise more generally-in the name of scientific advancement. “Thinking the unthinkable”-a strategy Tetlock employs when he gets experts to consider counterfactual scenarios that are far from their epistemic comfort zones-has had explosive consequences historically for both knowledge and morality by extending our sense of what is (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • “Analyzing How Rhetoric Is Epistemic”: A Reply to Steve Fuller.William D. Harpine - 2005 - Philosophy and Rhetoric 38 (1):82-88.
    In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:“Analyzing How Rhetoric is Epistemic”:A Reply to Steve FullerWilliam D. HarpineMy point in "What Do You Mean, Rhetoric Is Epistemic" (Harpine 2004) is that unclear and inconsistent use of terms has hindered previous research on the idea that rhetoric is epistemic. I propose to clarify definitions to alleviate this problem and encourage further research into how rhetoric might be epistemic. Professor Fuller's viewpoint is that definitions are inherently problematic, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Justice as a nexus of natural law and rhetoric.Jeffrey J. Maciejewski - 2008 - Philosophy and Rhetoric 41 (1):72-93.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • (1 other version)Thinking the Unthinkable as a Radical Scientific Project.Steve Fuller - 2010 - Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society 22 (4):397-413.
    Philip Tetlock underestimates the import of his own Expert Political Judgment. It is much more than a critical scientific evaluation of the accuracy and consistency of political pundits. It also offers a blueprint for challenging expertise more generally-in the name of scientific advancement. “Thinking the unthinkable”-a strategy Tetlock employs when he gets experts to consider counterfactual scenarios that are far from their epistemic comfort zones-has had explosive consequences historically for both knowledge and morality by extending our sense of what is (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations