Switch to: References

Citations of:

Introduction

Dialectica 60 (3):209-222 (2006)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Epistemological scientism and the scientific meta-method.Petri Turunen, Ilmari Hirvonen & Ilkka Pättiniemi - 2023 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 13 (2):1-23.
    This paper argues that the proponents of epistemological scientism must take some stand on scientific methodology. The supporters of scientism cannot simply defer to the social organisation of science because the social processes themselves must meet some methodological criteria. Among such criteria is epistemic evaluability, which demands intersubjective access to reasons. We derive twelve theses outlining some implications of epistemic evaluability. Evaluability can support weak and broad variants of epistemological scientism, which state that sciences, broadly construed, are the best sources (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • The Nature of Timbre.Vivian Mizrahi - 2023 - Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy 10.
    Along with pitch and loudness, timbre is commonly described as an audible property of sounds. This paper puts forward an alternative view—that timbres are properties of auditory media. This approach has many advantages. First, it accounts for the frequent attribution of timbres to objects that do not have characteristic sounds. Second, it explains why timbres are attributed not only to ordinary objects, like musical instruments, but also to surrounding spaces and architectural structures. And finally, it provides an original solution to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • More in Defense of Weak Scientism.Moti Mizrahi - 2018 - Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 7 (4):7-25.
    In my (2017a), I defend a view I call Weak Scientism, which is the view that knowledge produced by scientific disciplines is better than knowledge produced by non-scientific disciplines. Scientific knowledge can be said to be quantitatively better than non-scientific knowledge insofar as scientific disciplines produce more impactful knowledge–in the form of scholarly publications–than non-scientific disciplines (as measured by research output and research impact). Scientific knowledge can be said to be qualitatively better than non-scientific knowledge insofar as such knowledge is (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations