Browsing All posts tagged under »experts & expertise«

Effective because ethical: Speech act theory as a framework for scientists’ communication

January 22, 2016

0

Goodwin, Jean. (Forthcoming, 2017) Effective because ethical: Speech act theory as a framework for scientists’ communication. In Susanna Priest, Jean Goodwin & Michael Dahlstrom (Eds.), Ethics and practice in science communication. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

How to exercise expert authority: A case study of a scientist facing The Sceptics.

September 11, 2015

0

Goodwin, Jean. (2015). Comment exercer une autorité experte? Un scientifique confronté aux Sceptiques. Argumentation et Analyse du Discours, 15. Retrieved from https://aad.revues.org/2035 [How to exercise expert authority: A case study of a scientist facing The Sceptics. (2015). How to exercise expert authority: A case study of a scientist facing The Sceptics.] Argumetation theorists’ primary loyalty should be […]

Climate scientist Stephen Schneider versus the Sceptics: A case study of argumentation in deep disagreement.

September 11, 2015

0

Goodwin, Jean. (2015). Climate scientist Stephen Schneider versus the Sceptics:  A case study of argumentation in deep disagreement. In Proceedings of the Seventh Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Sic Sat. Can deep disagreement be managed by argument? This case study examines the 2010 exchange between prominent climate scientist/climate […]

Conceptions of speech acts in the theory and practice of argumentation

April 20, 2014

0

Goodwin, Jean. (2014).  Conceptions of speech acts in the theory and practice of argumentation: A case study of a debate about advocating.  Studies in Logic, Grammar & Rhetoric, 36 (49), 79-98. Far from being of interest only to argumentation theorists, concep- tions of speech acts play an important role in practitioners’ self-reflection on their own activities. […]

Communication strategies for earning trust in climate change debates

December 3, 2013

1

Climate scientists need the trust of lay audiences if they are to share their knowledge. But significant audience segments—those doubtful or dismissive of climate change—distrust climate scientists.

L’autorità di Wikipedia

July 4, 2013

1

Sistemi Intelligenti 25 (2013) 9-38; very kindly translated by Fabio Paglieri from the original. Philosophers of argumentation and of testimony suggest that we can rely on what someone says because of its epistemic merits. If so, then we should never credit Wikipedia, since we cannot assess what its anonymous contributors know. I propose instead that […]

Lippmann, the indispensable opposition

July 14, 2012

0

Lippmann's thoroughgoing pessimism may lead us to a better understanding of the role of communication in public deliberations between scientists and citizens.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.