Results for 'retraction'

24 found
Order:
  1.  29
    Retraction of Published Research.David Celiberti & Frank Cicero - 2020 - Science in Autism Treatment 17 (11):1-4.
    retraction NOUN 1. the action of drawing something back or back in. “The pilot retracted the airplane’s landing gear.” 2. a withdrawal of a statement, accusation, or undertaking. “The hospital retracted its job offer after learning that the applicant never graduated medical school.”.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2.  87
    Retraction and testimonial justification: a new problem for the assurance view.Matthew Vermaire - 2020 - Philosophical Studies 177 (12):3959-3972.
    The Assurance View, as advanced by Angus Ross and Richard Moran, makes the epistemology of testimony a matter of interpersonal commitments and entitlements. More specifically, I argue, their position is best understood as claiming that for someone’s belief to be testimonially justified is for some speaker to bear illocutionary responsibility for its truth. With this understanding in hand, I present a problem for the view that has so far escaped attention, a problem deriving from the wide freedom we have to (...)
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  3. The Case Against Semantic Relativism.Teresa Marques - 2019 - In Martin Kusch (ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Philosophy of Relativism. Routledge.
    This paper presents reasons against semantic relativism. Semantic relativism is motivated by intuitions that are presumed to raise problems for traditional or contextualist semantics in contested domains of discourse. Intuition-based arguments are those based on competent speakers’ putative intuitions about seeming faultless disagreement, eavesdropper, and retraction cases. I will organize the discussion in three parts. First, I shall provide a brief introduction to the intuition-based arguments offered in favor of semantic relativism. Second, I shall indicate that there are ways (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  4. Talking About Appearances: The Roles of Evaluation and Experience in Disagreement.Rachel Etta Rudolph - 2020 - Philosophical Studies 177 (1):197-217.
    Faultless disagreement and faultless retraction have been taken to motivate relativism for predicates of personal taste, like ‘tasty’. Less attention has been devoted to the question of what aspect of their meaning underlies this relativist behavior. This paper illustrates these same phenomena with a new category of expressions: appearance predicates, like ‘tastes vegan’ and ‘looks blue’. Appearance predicates and predicates of personal taste both fall into the broader category of experiential predicates. Approaching predicates of personal taste from this angle (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  5. Non-Indexical Vs. Assessment Relativism.Alexander Dinges - manuscript
    It is commonly held that retraction data, if we accept them, show that assessment relativism is to be preferred over non-indexical relativism (a.k.a. non-indexical contextualism). I will argue that this is not the case. Whether retraction data have the suggested probative force depends on substantive questions about the proper treatment of tense and location. One’s preferred account in these domains should determine which form of relativism one prefers.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  6. Dynamics of Epistemic Modality.Malte Willer - 2013 - Philosophical Review 122 (1):45-92.
    A dynamic semantics for epistemically modalized sentences is an attractive alternative to the orthodox view that our best theory of meaning ascribes to such sentences truth-conditions relative to what is known. This essay demonstrates that a dynamic theory about might and must offers elegant explanations of a range of puzzling observations about epistemic modals. The first part of the story offers a unifying treatment of disputes about epistemic modality and disputes about matters of fact while at the same time avoiding (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   61 citations  
  7.  74
    Retractions: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.Quan-Hoang Vuong - 2020 - LSE Impact of Social Sciences 2020 (2):1-4.
    Retractions play an important role in research communication by highlighting and explaining how research projects have failed and thereby preventing these mistakes from being repeated. However, the process of retraction and the data it produces is often sparse or incomplete. Drawing on evidence from 2046 retraction records, Quan-Hoang Vuong discusses the emerging trends this data highlights and argues for the need to enforce reporting standards for retractions, as a means of de-stigmatising retraction and rewarding practising integrity in (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  8.  29
    Relativism, Metasemantics, and the Future.Derek Ball - 2020 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 63 (9-10):1036-1086.
    ABSTRACT Contemporary relativists often see their view as contributing to a semantic/post-semantic account of linguistic data about disagreement and retraction. I offer an independently motivated metasemantic account of the same data, that also handles a number of cases and empirical results that are problematic for the relativist. The key idea is that the content of assertions and beliefs is determined in part by facts about other times, including times after the assertion is made or the belief is formed. On (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  9.  59
    Predicates of Personal Taste: Empirical Data.Markus Kneer - manuscript
    According to contextualism, the extension of claims of personal taste is dependent on the context of utterance. According to truth relativism, their extension depends on the context of assessment. On this view, when the tastes of a speaker change, so does the truth value of a previously uttered taste claim, and if it is false, the speaker is required to retract it. Both views make strong empirical assumptions, which are here put to the test for the first time in three (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  10. Assessment Relativism.Filippo Ferrari - forthcoming - In Martin Kusch (ed.), Routledge Handbook to Relativism.
    Assessment relativism, as developed by John MacFarlane, is the view that the truth of our claims involving a variety of English expressions—‘tasty’, ‘knows’, ‘tomorrow’, ‘might’, and ‘ought’—is relative not only to aspects of the context of their production but also to aspects of the context in which they are assessed. Assessment relativism is thus a form of truth relativism which is offered as a new way of understanding perspectival thought and talk. In this article, I present the main theses of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  11.  46
    要撤稿?请交代清楚这4 点!. 李晨阳 & 徐竞然 - 2020 - 中国科学报社 2020 (9):1-3.
    与发表论文时的风光不同,撤稿常常笼罩在一片沉默的尴尬中。 1975年至2019年间发布的2046篇撤稿论文,53%的文章没有说明撤稿声明究竟是作者还是期刊编辑部发布的;10%的文章没有给出撤稿理由;有些只是简单写道:“这篇论文已被撤回。”.
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  12.  81
    Minh bạch hóa quá trình thu hồi các ẩn phẩm học thuật.Viet-Anh Phu Duong - manuscript
    Vốn là một cơ sở dữ liệu thư mục uy tín hàng đầu của nhà xuất bản Elsevier, Scopus là kho dữ liệu lớn nhất, chỉ mục các bài báo của những nhà nghiên cứu, thủ thư và các tổ chức học thuật trên khắp thế giới. Để đảm bảo tính tin cậy học thuật, mọi ấn phẩm được chỉ mục trên Scopus đều phải trải qua một quá trình bình duyệt trước khi công bố. Ngoài ra, Scopus còn thường (...)
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  13.  22
    Các tạp chí KH Nga rút bỏ hơn 800 công bố.Nguyên Huyên - 2020 - SSHPA 2020 (1):1-2.
    Các tạp chí Nga vừa có đợt rút hơn 800 bài báo khoa học. Đây là kết quả bước đầu của cuộc điều tra quy mô lớn do Viện Hàn lâm Khoa học Nga (RAS) tiến hành, sau rất nhiều cáo buộc về các hành vi gian lận khoa học ở Nga.
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  14.  90
    Chúng ta nên thay đổi quan niệm về việc rút bài báo khoa học.Ban Biên Tập Ktdb - 2020 - Economy and Forecast Review 52 (6):1-2.
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  15.  97
    Rút bài, hành vi anh hùng và cơ chế tự hiệu chỉnh trong khoa học.Lương Anh Phương - 2020 - Khoa Học and Phát Triển 2020 (1):1-4.
    Trên thực tế, sự hoàn hảo của các kết quả học thuật luôn được tạo nên bởi các sai lầm và thất bại. Cơ chế tự hiệu chỉnh chính là một nét đẹp tự nhiên của khoa học, và việc rút bài cũng góp phần tạo nên vẻ đẹp ấy.
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  16.  53
    Retractions: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.Vuong Quan-Hoang - 2020 - Nature Index.
    While it seems obvious that withdrawing papers, which contain errors or misconduct, helps to keep the literature healthy, researchers want to avoid retractions at all costs.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  17.  26
    Faulty Scientific Paper has Damaged All Sides.Australasian Timber - 2020 - Australian Forests and Timber News 2020 (9):1-4.
    What does that mean to have an academic peer-reviewed paper retracted by the publisher?
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  18.  65
    Cần minh bạch hơn việc rút bài báo khoa học.Hồ Mạnh Toàn - 2020 - Khoa Học Và Phát Triển 2020 (6):1-3.
    Tác giả Vương Quân Hoàng (Trung tâm Nghiên cứu Xã hội Liên ngành ISR, trường Đại học Phenikaa) vừa có bài viết quan điểm trên tạp chí Nature về việc làm thế nào để việc rút bài báo khoa học trở nên minh bạch hơn, mang lại lợi ích cho bản thân nhà khoa học bị rút bài cũng như cộng đồng khoa học.
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  19.  60
    Retractions Data Mining #1.Quan-Hoang Vuong & Viet-Phuong La - 2019 - Open Science Framework 2019 (2):1-3.
    Motivation: • Breaking barriers in publishing demands a proactive attitude • Open data, open review and open dialogue in making social sciences plausible .
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  20. Rawls’s Justification Model for Ethics: What Exactly Justifies the Model?Necip Fikri Alican - 2020 - Dialogue and Universalism 30 (1):171–190.
    This is a defense of Rawls against recent criticism, ironically my own, though it is also a critique insofar as it addresses a problem that Rawls never does. As a defense, it is not a retraction of the original charges. As a critique, it is not more of the same op-position. In either capacity, it is not an afterthought. The charges were conceived from the outset with a specific solution in mind, which would have been too distracting to pursue (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  21. Asserting as Commitment to Knowing. An Essay on the Normativity of Assertion.Ivan Milić - 2015 - Dissertation, University of Barcelona
    In this thesis, I propose and defend a theory according to which committing oneself to knowing the proposition expressed counts as an assertion of that proposition. A consequence of this view is the knowledge account of assertion, according to which one asserts that p correctly only if one knows that p. In support of this approach, I offer a strategy of identifying an assertion’s “normative consequences”, types of act that normally take place as a result of one’s making an assertion (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  22. Eavesdropping: What is It Good For?Jonathan Phillips & Matthew Mandelkern - forthcoming - Semantics and Pragmatics.
    Eavesdropping judgments (judgments about truth, retraction, and consistency across contexts) about epistemic modals have been used in recent years to argue for a radical thesis: that truth is assessment-relative. We argue that judgments for 'I think that p' pattern in strikingly similar ways to judgments for 'Might p' and 'Probably p'. We argue for this by replicating three major experiments involving the latter and adding a condition with the form 'I think that p', showing that subjects respond in the (...)
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  23.  67
    What’s Happening in Open Science?Adeline Rosenberg - 2020 - Weekly Digest Open Pharma 2020 (6).
    Featuring the questionable transparency of some COVID-19 data, retraction notices and clinical trial results, what COVID-19 has taught us about open access, a centralized archive of COVID-19 preprints, and how the pandemic may affect the public’s trust in science.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  24. The Nature of (Covert) Dogwhistles.Manuel Almagro & José Ramón Torices - 2018 - In Cristian Saborido, Sergi Oms & Javier González de Prado (eds.), Proceedings of the IX Conference of the Spanish Society of Lógic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science. Madrid, España: pp. 93-100.
    ‘Dogwhistle’ refers to a kind of political manipulation that some people carry out for political gains. According to Saul (2018), dogwhistles can be either intentional or unintentional depending on whether the speaker carried out the dogwhistle deliberately or not —although one cannot always recognize whether a particular case was intentional. In addition to being intentional or not, dogwhistles can also be overt or covert depending on whether the audience is aware or not of the dogwhistle. In the case of overt (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark