Results for 'Scientism'

1000+ found
Order:
  1. Moderate scientism in philosophy.Buckwalter Wesley & John Turri - 2018 - In Jeroen de Ridder, Rik Peels & Rene van Woudenberg (eds.), Scientism: Prospects and Problems. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    Moderate scientism is the view that empirical science can help answer questions in nonscientific disciplines. In this paper, we evaluate moderate scientism in philosophy. We review several ways that science has contributed to research in epistemology, action theory, ethics, philosophy of language, and philosophy of mind. We also review several ways that science has contributed to our understanding of how philosophers make judgments and decisions. Based on this research, we conclude that the case for moderate philosophical scientism (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  2. Scientistic Philosophy, No; Scientific Philosophy, Yes.Susan Haack - 2021 - Journal of Philosophical Investigations 15 (36):4-35.
    If successful scientific inquiry is to be possible, there must be a world that is independent of how we believe it to be, and in which there are kinds and laws; and we must have the sensory apparatus to perceive particular things and events, and the capacity to represent them, to form generalized explanatory conjectures, and check how these conjectures stand up to further experience. Whether these preconditions are met is not a question the sciences can answer; it is specifically (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  3. Scientism and Scientific Thinking.Renia Gasparatou - 2017 - Science & Education 26 (7-9):799-812.
    The move from respecting science to scientism, i.e., the idealization of science and scientific method, is simple: We go from acknowledging the sciences as fruitful human activities to oversimplifying the ways they work, and accepting a fuzzy belief that Science and Scientific Method, will give us a direct pathway to the true making of the world, all included. The idealization of science is partly the reason why we feel we need to impose the so-called scientific terminologies and methodologies to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  4. Should Scientists Embrace Scientific Realism or Antirealism?Seungbae Park - 2019 - Philosophical Forum 50 (1):147-158.
    If scientists embrace scientific realism, they can use a scientific theory to explain and predict observables and unobservables. If, however, they embrace scientific antirealism, they cannot use a scientific theory to explain observables and unobservables, and cannot use a scientific theory to predict unobservables. Given that explanation and prediction are means to make scientific progress, scientists can make more scientific progress, if they embrace scientific realism than if they embrace scientific antirealism.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  5. Wittgenstein, Scientism, and Anti-Scientism in the Philosophy of Mind.William Child - 2017 - In Jonathan Beale & Ian James Kidd (eds.), Wittgenstein and Scientism. Abingdon: Routledge. pp. 81-100.
    Part 1 of this paper sketches Wittgenstein’s opposition to scientism in general. Part 2 explores his opposition to scientism in philosophy focusing, in particular, on philosophy of mind; how must philosophy of mind proceed if it is to avoid the kind of scientism that Wittgenstein complains about? Part 3 examines a central anti-scientistic strand in Wittgenstein’s Last Writings on the Philosophy of Psychology volume II: his treatment of the ‘uncertainty’ of the relation between ‘outer’ behaviour and ‘inner’ (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  6. Weak Scientism Defended Once More: A Reply to Wills.Moti Mizrahi - 2018 - Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 7 (6):41-50.
    Bernard Wills (2018) joins Christopher Brown (2017, 2018) in criticizing my defense of Weak Scientism (Mizrahi 2017a, 2017b, 2018a). Unfortunately, it seems that Wills did not read my latest defense of Weak Scientism carefully, nor does he cite any of the other papers in my exchange with Brown.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  7. 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 (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  8. Scientists as experts: A distinct role?Torbjørn Gundersen - 2018 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 69:52-59.
    The role of scientists as experts is crucial to public policymaking. However, the expert role is contested and unsettled in both public and scholarly discourse. In this paper, I provide a systematic account of the role of scientists as experts in policymaking by examining whether there are any normatively relevant differences between this role and the role of scientists as researchers. Two different interpretations can be given of how the two roles relate to each other. The separability view states that (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  9. Aesthetics, scientism, and ordinary language: A comparison between Wittgenstein and Heidegger.Andreas Vrahimis - 2018 - Proceedings of the European Society for Aesthetics 10:659-684.
    Wittgenstein and Heidegger’s objections against the possibility of an aesthetic science were influential on different sides of the analytic/continental divide. Heidegger’s anti-scientism is tied up with a critique of the reduction of the work of art to an object of aesthetic experience. This leads him to an aletheic view of artworks which precedes and exceeds any possible aesthetic reduction. Wittgenstein too rejects the relevance of causal explanations, psychological or physiological, to aesthetic questions. His appeal to ordinary language provides the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  10. Scientists are Epistemic Consequentialists about Imagination.Michael T. Stuart - forthcoming - Philosophy of Science:1-22.
    Scientists imagine for epistemic reasons, and these imaginings can be better or worse. But what does it mean for an imagining to be epistemically better or worse? There are at least three metaepistemological frameworks that present different answers to this question: epistemological consequentialism, deontic epistemology, and virtue epistemology. This paper presents empirical evidence that scientists adopt each of these different epistemic frameworks with respect to imagination, but argues that the way they do this is best explained if scientists are fundamentally (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  11. Six Signs of Scientism.Susan Haack - 2012 - Logos and Episteme 3 (1):75-95.
    As the English word “scientism” is currently used, it is a trivial verbal truth that scientism—an inappropriately deferential attitude to science—should be avoided. But it is a substantial question when, and why, deference to the sciences is inappropriate or exaggerated. This paper tries to answer that question by articulating “six signs of scientism”: the honorific use of “science” and its cognates; using scientific trappings purely decoratively; preoccupation with demarcation; preoccupation with “scientific method”; looking to the sciences for (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   21 citations  
  12. Wittgenstein's Anti-scientistic Worldview.Jonathan Beale - 2017 - In Jonathan Beale & Ian James Kidd (eds.), Wittgenstein and Scientism. London: Routledge. pp. 59-80.
    This chapter outlines ways in which Wittgenstein’s opposition to scientism is manifest in his later conception of philosophy and the negative attitude he held toward his times. The chapter tries to make clear how these two areas of Wittgenstein’s thought are connected and reflect an anti-scientistic worldview he held, one intimated in Philosophical Investigations §122. -/- It is argued that the later Wittgenstein’s metaphilosophy is marked out against two scientistic claims in particular. First, the view that the scientific method (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  13. Scientism, Philosophy and Brain-Based Learning.Gregory M. Nixon - 2013 - Northwest Journal of Teacher Education 11 (1):113-144.
    [This is an edited and improved version of "You Are Not Your Brain: Against 'Teaching to the Brain'" previously published in *Review of Higher Education and Self-Learning* 5(15), Summer 2012.] Since educators are always looking for ways to improve their practice, and since empirical science is now accepted in our worldview as the final arbiter of truth, it is no surprise they have been lured toward cognitive neuroscience in hopes that discovering how the brain learns will provide a nutshell explanation (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  14. Anti-Scientism, Conceptual Analysis and High-End Science Journalism.Filip Tvrdý - 2016 - Czech and Slovak Journal of Humanities: Philosophica 3 (1):70-76.
    In Ancient Greece, when philosophy began, it included all the theoretical knowledge. But later, in the time of Aristotle, specialized sciences started to emerge and the scope of philosophy grew smaller and smaller. The question is what to do when philosophy has lost its competence to deal with any relevant topic. The paper discusses three possible views of the relation between philosophy and science: anti-scientism, conceptual analysis and naturalism. All these approaches deal with various disadvantages. For anti-scientism it (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  15. Scientism after its Discontents.Andrés Pereyra Rabanal - 2022 - Mεtascience: Scientific General Discourse 2:206-224.
    Scientism has more notoriety than history proper for it has been identified with “positivism”, “reductionism”, “materialism” or “Marxism”, or even held responsible for the enforcement of science at the expense of other human affairs. The idea that scientific research yields the best possible knowledge lies at the very definition of “scientism”. However, even when science has shown a considerable amount of theoretical and practical successes, a rational confidence put on it as a mean for solving any factual problem (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  16. In Defense of Weak Scientism: A Reply to Brown.Moti Mizrahi - 2017 - Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 6 (2):9-22.
    In “What’s So Bad about Scientism?” (Mizrahi 2017), I argue that Weak Scientism, the view that “Of all the knowledge we have, scientific knowledge is the best knowledge” (Mizrahi 2017, 354; emphasis in original) is a defensible position. That is to say, Weak Scientism “can be successfully defended against objections” (Mizrahi 2017, 354). In his response to Mizrahi (2017), Christopher Brown (2017) provides more objections against Weak Scientism, and thus another opportunity for me to show that (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  17. Feyerabend, science, and scientism.Ian James Kidd - 2021 - In Karim Bschir & Jamie Shaw (eds.), Interpreting Feyerabend: Critical Essays. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
    I argue that a main theme Feyerabend's philosophical work was a critique of scientism. This devolves into two sub-critiques - a critique of conceptions of science's self-understanding and a critique of scientific cultures. The former is more compelling and more aligned with mainstream themes in Anglophone analytical philosophy of science, the latter is less developed but more resonant with themes in feminist, postcolonial and 'continental' forms of philosophy of science.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  18. Axiological Values in Natural Scientists and the Natural Sciences.Rem B. Edwards - 2022 - Journal of Formal Axiology: Theory and Practice 15 (1):23-37.
    This article explains that and how values and evaluations are unavoidably and conspicuously present within natural scientists and their sciences—and why they are definitely not “value-free”. It shows how such things can be rationally understood and assessed within the framework of formal axiology, the value theory developed by Robert S. Hartman and those who have been deeply influenced by his reflections. It explains Hartman’s highly plausible and applicable definitions of “good” and related value concepts. It identifies three basic kinds of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  19. How Not to Criticise Scientism.Johan Hietanen, Petri Turunen, Ilmari Hirvonen, Janne Karisto, Ilkka Pättiniemi & Henrik Saarinen - 2020 - Metaphilosophy 51 (4):522-547.
    This paper argues that the main global critiques of scientism lose their punch because they rely on an uncharitable definition of their target. It focuses on epistemological scientism and divides it into four categories in terms of how strong (science is the only source of knowledge) or weak (science is the best source of knowledge) and how narrow (only natural sciences) or broad (all sciences or at least not only the natural sciences) they are. Two central arguments against (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  20.  99
    What Scientists Know Is Not a Function of What Scientists Know.P. D. Magnus - 2013 - Philosophy of Science 80 (5):840-849.
    There are two senses of ‘what scientists know’: An individual sense (the separate opinions of individual scientists) and a collective sense (the state of the discipline). The latter is what matters for policy and planning, but it is not something that can be directly observed or reported. A function can be defined to map individual judgments onto an aggregate judgment. I argue that such a function cannot effectively capture community opinion, especially in cases that matter to us.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  21. Althusser’s Scientism and Aleatory Materialism.William S. Lewis - 2016 - Décalages 2 (1):1-72.
    This paper argues that the reading of Althusser which finds a pronounced continuity in his conception of the relations among science, philosophy, and politics is the correct one, this essay will begin with an examination of Althusser’s “scientism.” The meaning of this term (one that differs slightly from contemporary usages) will be specified before showing how and in what way Althusser’s political philosophy between 1960 and 1980 can be described as “scientistic.” The next section details the important political role (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  22. Tom Sorell on Scientism.Andrew Lugg & J. F. McDonald - 1993 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 23 (2):291-298.
    Critical notice of Tom Sorell's Scientism: Philosophy and the Infatuation with Science.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  23. The Supposed Spectre of Scientism.Amanda Bryant - 2022 - In Moti Mizrahi Mizrahi (ed.), For and Against Scientism: Science, Methodology, and the Future of Philosophy. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. pp. 47-74.
    This chapter considers the assumptions required to make scientisms of different forms genuinely threatening to philosophers, where a genuine threat would consist of a concrete risk to their statuses, the value of their teaching and research, their livelihoods, their preferred research methods, or the health of the discipline. I will find that strong and weak forms of scientism alike require substantive assumptions to make them threatening in those regards. In particular, they require sometimes heavy-handed circumscriptions of philosophy and science, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  24.  91
    Roles for scientists in policymaking.Joe Roussos - manuscript
    What is the proper role for scientists in policymaking? This paper explores various roles that scientists can play, with an eye to questions that these roles raise about value-neutrality and technocracy. Where much philosophical literature is concerned with the conduct of research or the transmission of research results to policymakers, I am interested in various non-research roles that scientists take on in policymaking. These include raising the alarm on issues, framing and conceptualising problems, formulating potential policies, assessing policy options for (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  25.  73
    Scientism[REVIEW]Andrew Lugg & J. F. McDonald - 1993 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 23 (2):291-298.
    Critical notice of Tom Sorell, Scientism: Philosophy and the Infatuation with Science. Exception is taken to the analysis of the ailment and the suggested cure.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  26. New Atheism and the Scientistic Turn in the Atheism Movement.Massimo Pigliucci - 2013 - Midwest Studies in Philosophy 37 (1):142-153.
    The so-called “New Atheism” is a relatively well-defined, very recent, still unfold- ing cultural phenomenon with import for public understanding of both science and philosophy. Arguably, the opening salvo of the New Atheists was The End of Faith by Sam Harris, published in 2004, followed in rapid succession by a number of other titles penned by Harris himself, Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Victor Stenger, and Christopher Hitchens.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  27. Philosophers and Scientists Are Social Epistemic Agents.Seungbae Park - 2018 - Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective.
    In this paper, I reply to Markus Arnold’s comment and Amanda Bryant’s comment on my work “Can Kuhn’s Taxonomic Incommensurability be an Image of Science?” in Moti Mizrahi’s edited collection, The Kuhnian Image of Science: Time for a Decisive Transformation?. Philosophers and scientists are social epistemic agents. As such, they ought to behave in accordance with epistemic norms governing the behavior of social epistemic agents.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  28. Ethics of the scientist qua policy advisor: inductive risk, uncertainty, and catastrophe in climate economics.David M. Frank - 2019 - Synthese:3123-3138.
    This paper discusses ethical issues surrounding Integrated Assessment Models (IAMs) of the economic effects of climate change, and how climate economists acting as policy advisors ought to represent the uncertain possibility of catastrophe. Some climate economists, especially Martin Weitzman, have argued for a precautionary approach where avoiding catastrophe should structure climate economists’ welfare analysis. This paper details ethical arguments that justify this approach, showing how Weitzman’s “fat tail” probabilities of climate catastrophe pose ethical problems for widely used IAMs. The main (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  29.  74
    Should Scientists Ignore Philosophical Theories of Evidence?Jason Zarri - manuscript
    In his article “Why Philosophical Theories of Evidence Are (and Ought to Be) Ignored by Scientists,” Peter Achinstein argues that philosophical theories of evidence are ignored by scientists because they rest on assumptions which make their concepts of evidence too weak for scientists to work with, or which entail that the truth or falsity of evidential statements can be determined a priori. Given that, as Achinstein argues, the truth of many evidential statements can only be determined empirically, this “a priorist” (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  30. Anti-Scientism, Conceptual Analysis, Naturalism.Filip Tvrdý - 2018 - Pro-Fil 19 (1):49-61.
    Filozofie ve 20. století ztratila velkou část svých kompetencí a pro svou údajnou neužitečnost se stala terčem kritiky ze strany přírodních vědců. Vztah mezi filozofií a vědou lze řešit pomocí tří stanovisek, kterými jsou antiscientismus, konceptuální analýza a naturalismus. Obsahem článku je charakteristika jednotlivých přístupů a identifikace problémů, s nimiž se musí jejich zastánci potýkat. Autorovi se jako nejslibnější jeví Quinem inspirovaný naturalismus, podle něhož má veškeré poznání povahu syntetických aposteriorních výroků, a filozofie je proto kontinuální s přírodní vědou. Není (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  31. Are scientists a workforce? – Or, how Dr. Frankenstein made biomedical research sick.Yuri Lazebnik - 2015 - EMBO Reports 16 (12):1592-1600.
    A proposed plan to rescue US biomedical research from its current ‘malaise’ will not be effective as it misdiagnoses the root cause of the disease.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  32. Scientism on Steroids: A Review of Freedom Evolves by Daniel Dennett (2003) (review revised 2019).Michael Starks - 2019 - In Suicidal Utopian Delusions in the 21st Century -- Philosophy, Human Nature and the Collapse of Civilization -- Articles and Reviews 2006-2019 4th Edition. Las Vegas , NV USA: Reality Press. pp. 200-216.
    ``People say again and again that philosophy doesn´t really progress, that we are still occupied with the same philosophical problems as were the Greeks. But the people who say this don´t understand why it has to be so. It is because our language has remained the same and keeps seducing us into asking the same questions. As long as there continues to be a verb ´to be´ that looks as if it functions in the same way as ´to eat and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  33. Physicalism, not scientism.Alyssa Ney - 2018 - In Jeroen de Ridder, Rik Peels & Rene van Woudenberg (eds.), Scientism: Prospects and Problems. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  34. From children’s literature to sustainability science, and young scientists for a more sustainable Earth.Quan-Hoang Vuong - 2020 - Journal of Sustainability Education 23 (4):3-14.
    This essay evolved from my keynote address for the plenary session of the ASEAN Conference for Young Scientists 2019 organized by the ASEAN Secretariat, Vietnam Ministry of Science and Technology—whose main theme is sustainability science—organized at Hanoi-based Phenikaa University. It has also benefited from my advisory work for the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN).
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  35. The Diviner and the Scientist: Revisiting the Question of Alternative Standards of Rationality.Brian Epstein - 2010 - Journal of the American Academy of Religion 78 (4):1048-1086.
    Are the standards of reasoning and rationality in divination, religious practice, and textual exegesis different from those in the sciences? Can there be different standards of reasoning and rationality at all? The intense “rationality debate” of the 1960s, 70s, and 80s focused on these questions and the related problems of relativism across cultures and systems of practice. Although philosophers were at the center of these debates at the time, they may appear to have abandoned the question in recent years. On (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  36. Conceptions of Philosophy and the Challenges of Scientism.Ian James Kidd - 2022 - In Moti Mizrahi (ed.), Scientism: For and Against. New York: Rowman and Littlefield. pp. 75-86.
    I suspect many philosophers feel the deep reason the topic of scientism matters is that it wrongly questions or impugns the integrity and significance of the discipline of philosophy. Such metaphilosophical concerns may not always be at the forefront during debates about scientism. Sometimes, though, we should engage much broader metaphilosophical issues.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  37. Algorithmic Opinion Mining and the History of Philosophy: A Response to Mizrahi’s For and Against Scientism.Andreas Vrahimis - 2023 - Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 12 (5):33-41.
    At the heart of Mizrahi’s project lies a sociological narrative concerning the recent history of philosophers’ negative attitudes towards scientism. Critics (e.g. de Ridder (2019), Wilson (2019) and Bryant (2020)), have detected various empirical inadequacies in Mizrahi’s methodology for discussing these attitudes. Bryant (2020) points out one of the main pertinent methodological deficiencies here, namely that the mere appearance of the word ‘scientism’ in a text does not suffice in determining whether the author feels threatened by it. Not (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  38. 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 (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  39. 47 Vietnamese people are among the world’s most influential scientists in 2023.Nhu Quynh - 2023 - Vietnam Posts English.
    Vietnamese scientists on the list of “100,000 influential scientists” this year have increased sharply in number and rank. -/- The ranking was published by Elsevier Publishing House (owner of the Scopus database), selected by a group of scientists led by Professor John PA Ioannidis and colleagues from Stanford University (USA) based on the Scopus database. The top 100,000 list is selected from 210,000 of the world’s most influential scientists in terms of most cited scientific articles.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  40. What’s so bad about scientism?Moti Mizrahi - 2017 - Social Epistemology 31 (4):351-367.
    In their attempt to defend philosophy from accusations of uselessness made by prominent scientists, such as Stephen Hawking, some philosophers respond with the charge of ‘scientism.’ This charge makes endorsing a scientistic stance, a mistake by definition. For this reason, it begs the question against these critics of philosophy, or anyone who is inclined to endorse a scientistic stance, and turns the scientism debate into a verbal dispute. In this paper, I propose a different definition of scientism, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  41. Person as scientist, person as moralist.Joshua Knobe - 2010 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33 (4):315.
    It has often been suggested that people’s ordinary capacities for understanding the world make use of much the same methods one might find in a formal scientific investigation. A series of recent experimental results offer a challenge to this widely-held view, suggesting that people’s moral judgments can actually influence the intuitions they hold both in folk psychology and in causal cognition. The present target article distinguishes two basic approaches to explaining such effects. One approach would be to say that the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   182 citations  
  42. Sympathy for the Scientist: Re-Calibrating a Heideggerian Critique of Metaphysics.Jonathan Morgan - manuscript
    This paper attempts to develop an ethico-aesthetic framework for enriching one's life and ethical outlook. Drawing primarily from Nietzsche, Foucault, and Heidegger, an argument is made that Heidegger's understanding of this issue was mistaken. The ontological crisis of modernity is not the overt influence of mathematics as a worldview over poetics and more traditionally aesthetic approaches. It is the rampant mis-and over-application of abstraction within one's view of the world while denying the material realities of life as we live it. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  43. How to Foster Scientists' Creativity.Seungbae Park - 2016 - Creativity Studies 9 (2):117-126.
    Scientific progress can be credited to creative scientists, who constantly ideate new theories and experiments. I explore how the three central positions in philosophy of science – scientific realism, scientific pessimism, and instrumentalism – are related to the practical issue of how scientists’ creativity can be fostered. I argue that realism encourages scientists to entertain new theories and experiments, pessimism discourages them from doing so, and instrumentalism falls in between realism and pessimism in terms of its effects on scientists’ creativity. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  44.  40
    Erroneous concepts of prominent scientists: C. F. Weizsäcker, J. A. Wheeler, S. Wolfram, S. Lloyd, J. Schmidhuber, and M. Vopson, resulting from misunderstanding of information and complexity.Mariusz Stanowski - 2024 - Journal of Information Science 1:9.
    The common use of Shannon’s information, specified for the needs of telecommunications, gives rise to many misunderstandings outside of this context. (e.g. in conceptions of such well-known theorists as C.F. Weizsäcker and J. A. Wheeler). This article shows that the terms of the general definition of information meet the structural information, and Shannon’s information is a special case of it. Similarly, complexity is misunderstood today as exemplified by the concepts of reputable computer scientists, such as S. Lloyd, S. Wolfram and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  45.  64
    Neither moralists, nor scientists: We are counterfactually reasoning animals.Bence Nanay - 2010 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33 (4):347-348.
    We are neither scientists nor moralists. Our mental capacities (such as attributing intentionality) are neither akin to the scientist's exact reasoning, nor are they (Knobe's target article, sect. 2.2, last para.). They are more similar to all those simple capacities that humans and animals are equally capable of, but with enhanced sensitivity to counterfactual situations: of what could have been.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  46. Ludwik Fleck's Scientism.Markus Seidel - 2015 - Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 4 (8):79-88.
    In a recent paper in 'Social Epistemology' Dimitri Ginev aims to show that Ludwik Fleck uses transcendental arguments in two contexts in his work that are closely intertwined: the context of comparative cognitive sociology and the context of socio-historical epistemology. I am skeptical about Ginev’s interpretation and my aim is to show that at least the part of Ginev’s argument in which he aims to show Fleck’s use of transcendental arguments in the context of socio-historical epistemology is not convincing. To (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  47. The Limits of Democratizing Science: When Scientists Should Ignore the Public.S. Andrew Schroeder - 2022 - Philosophy of Science 89 (5):1034-1043.
    Scientists are frequently called upon to “democratize” science, by bringing the public into scientific research. One appealing point for public involvement concerns the nonepistemic values involved in science. Suppose, though, a scientist invites the public to participate in making such value-laden determinations but finds that the public holds values the scientist considers morally unacceptable. Does the argument for democratizing science commit the scientist to accepting the public’s objectionable values, or may she veto them? I argue that there are a limited (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  48. 47 Vietnamese people are among the world's most influential scientists in 2023.Authority of Foreign Information Service - 2023 - Vietnam Information Service.
    Vietnamese scientists on the list of "100.000 influential scientists" this year increased sharply in number and rank. -/- The ranking was selected by a group of scientists led by Professor John PA Ioannidis and colleagues from Stanford University (USA) on the Scopus database and published by Elsevier Publishing House.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  49. Reawakening to Wonder: Wittgenstein, Feyerabend, and Scientism.Ian James Kidd - 2018 - In Jonathan Beale & Ian James Kidd (eds.), Wittgenstein and Scientism. London: Routledge. pp. 101-115.
    My aim in this chapter is to reconstruct Feyerabend’s anti-scientism by comparing it with the similar critiques of one of his main philosophical influences – Ludwig Wittgenstein. I argue that they share a common conception of scientism that gathers around a concern that it erodes a sense of wonder or mystery required for a full appreciation of human existence – a sense that Feyerabend, like Wittgenstein, characterised in terms of the ‘mystical’.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  50. The Will to Truth and the Will to Believe: Friedrich Nietzsche and William James Against Scientism.Rachel Cristy - 2018 - Dissertation, Princeton University
    My dissertation brings into conversation two thinkers who are seldom considered together and highlights previously unnoticed similarities in their critical responses to scientism, which was just as prevalent in the late nineteenth century as it is today. I analyze this attitude as consisting of two linked propositions. The first, which Nietzsche calls “the unconditional will to truth,” is that the aims of science, discovering truth and avoiding error, are the most important human aims; and the second is that no (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
1 — 50 / 1000