Argumentation Mar 2014

Scientific Controversies and the Ethics of Arguing and Belief in the Face of Rational Disagreement

Xavier de Donato Rodríguez Universidade de Santiago de Compostela ; Jesús Zamora Bonilla Distance State University
Journal
Argumentation
Published
2014-03-01
DOI
10.1007/s10503-013-9300-4
CompPile
Search in CompPile ↗
Open Access
Closed
Export
BibTeX RIS

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (1)

  1. Duarte (2024)
    Epidemiology of Fallacies
    Argumentation

Cites in this index (0)

No references match articles in this index.

Also cites 41 works outside this index ↓
  1. W Alston (1988)
    Alston, W. 1988. The deontological conception of epistemic justification. Philosophical Perspectives 2: 257–299.
    Philosophical Perspectives  ↗
  2. Andersen, H., P. Barker, and X. Chen. 2006. The cognitive structure of scientific revolutions. Cambridge: Cam…
     ↗
  3. A Baltas (2000)
    Scientific controversies
     ↗
  4. Barker, P. 2011. The cognitive structure of scientific revolutions. Erkenntnis 75(3): 445–465.
     ↗
  5. RM Chisholm (1956)
    Chisholm, R.M. 1956. Epistemic statements and the ethics of belief. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research …
    Philosophy and Phenomenological Research  ↗
  6. D Christensen (2007)
    Christensen, D. 2007. Epistemology of disagreement: the good news. Philosophical Review 116(2): 187–217.
    Philosophical Review  ↗
  7. D Christensen (2009)
    Christensen, D. 2009. Disagreement as evidence: The epistemology of controversy. Philosophy Compass 4(5): 756–767.
    Philosophy Compass  ↗
  8. Dascal, M. 1995. Epistemology, controversies and pragmatics, spanish original version published. Isegoría 12:…
     ↗
  9. D Davidson (1974)
    Davidson, D. 1974. On the very idea of a conceptual scheme. Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philoso…
    Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association  ↗
  10. M Devitt (1979)
    Devitt, M. 1979. Against incommensurability. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 57: 29–50.
    Australasian Journal of Philosophy  ↗
  11. M Devitt (2001)
    Incomensurability and related matters
     ↗
  12. de Donato Rodríguez, X. and J. Zamora Bonilla 2009. Credibility, idealisation, and model building: An inferen…
     ↗
  13. de Donato Rodríguez, X. and J. Zamora Bonilla. 2012. Explanation and modelization in a comprehensive inferent…
     ↗
  14. A Elga (2007)
    Elga, A. 2007. Reflection and disagreement. Noûs 41(3): 478–502.
    Noûs  ↗
  15. Elga, A. 2010. How to disagree about how to disagree. In Disagreement, ed. Feldman and Warfield, Chapter 7, 1…
     ↗
  16. R Feldman (2000)
    Feldman, R. 2000. The ethics of belief. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 60(3): 667–695.
    Philosophy and Phenomenological Research  ↗
  17. Ferreira, A. 2005. On the role of pragmatics, rhetoric and dialectic in scientific controversies. In Controve…
     ↗
  18. G Freudenthal (2000)
    Scientific controversies
     ↗
  19. A Goldman (1999)
    Goldman, A. 1999. Internalism exposed. The Journal of Philosophy 96: 271–293.
    The Journal of Philosophy  ↗
  20. Goldman, A. 2010. Epistemic relativism and reasonable disagreement. In Disagreement, ed. Feldman and Warfield…
     ↗
  21. R Grandy (2000)
    Scientific controversies
     ↗
  22. Hartmann, S., C. Martini, and J. Sprenger. 2009. Consensual decision-making among epistemic peers. Episteme 6…
     ↗
  23. D Jehle (2009)
    Jehle, D., and B. Fitelson. 2009. What is the ‘equal weight view’? Episteme 6(3): 280–293.
    Episteme  ↗
  24. Kelly, Th. 2010. Peer Disagreement and higher-order evidence. In Disagreement, ed. Feldman and Warfield, Chap…
     ↗
  25. P Kitcher (2000)
    Scientific controversies
     ↗
  26. Kornblith, H. 2010. Belief in the face of controversy. In Disagreement, ed. Feldman and Warfield, Chapter 2, …
     ↗
  27. G Kutrovátz (2008)
    Controversy and confrontation: Relating controversy analysis with argumentation theory
     ↗
  28. I Lakatos (1978)
    The Methodology of scientific research programmes: Philosophical papers
     ↗
  29. K Lehrer (1976)
    Lehrer, K. 1976. When rational disagreement is impossible. Noûs 10: 327–332.
    Noûs  ↗
  30. Locke, J. 1690/1975. An essay concerning human understanding. Oxford: Clarendon.
     ↗
  31. E McMullin (1987)
    Scientific controversies
     ↗
  32. L Olivé (2005)
    Controversies and subjectivity
     ↗
  33. M Pera (2000)
    Scientific controversies
     ↗
  34. Ph Pettit (2006)
    Pettit, Ph. 2006. When to defer to majority testimony—and when not. Analysis 66(3): 179–187.
    Analysis  ↗
  35. A Plantinga (1993)
    Warrant: The current debate
     ↗
  36. H Putnam (1981)
    Reason, truth and history
     ↗
  37. E Sosa (2010)
    Social epistemology
     ↗
  38. FH Eemeren van (1984)
    Speech acts in argumentative discussions
     ↗
  39. Zamora Bonilla, J. 2006a. Science studies and the theory of games. Perspectives on Science 14(4): 525–557.
     ↗
  40. Zamora Bonilla, J. 2006b. Science as a persuasion game: An inferentialist approach. Episteme 2(3): 189–201.
     ↗
  41. GA Zemplén (2008)
    Controversy and confrontation: Relating controversy analysis with argumentation theory
     ↗
CrossRef global citation count: 4 View in citation network → Build reading path →