Browsing All posts tagged under »case studies«

Demonstrating objectivity in controversial science communication: A case study of GMO scientist Kevin Folta.

October 13, 2018

0

Goodwin, Jean. (2016). Demonstrating objectivity in controversial science communication: A case study of GMO scientist Kevin Folta. OSSA Conference Archive. 69. Retrieved from https://scholar.uwindsor.ca/ossaarchive/OSSA11/papersandcommentaries/69 Scientists can find it difficult to be seen as objective within the chaos of a civic controversy. This paper gives a normative pragmatic account of the strategy one GMO scientist used […]

Re-framing climate controversy: The strategies of The Hartwell Paper

October 8, 2018

0

Goodwin, Jean. (Forthcoming, 2019) Re-framing climate controversy: The strategies of The Hartwell Paper. In Proceedings of the 9th Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation. In the public sphere, standpoints often seem to be locked into pro/con constellations. This essay documents the strategies of “pointing out,” narrative and metaphor used in The Hartwell Paper […]

The pragmatic force of making reasons apparent

September 15, 2015

0

Goodwin Pragmatic ForceGoodwin, J., & Innocenti, B. (2016). The Pragmatic Force of Making Reasons Apparent. InD. Mohammed & M. Lewinski (Eds.), Argumentation and Reasoned Action (Vol. 2, pp. 449–462). College Publications. Making arguments makes reasons apparent. Sometimes those reasons may affect audiences. But over-emphasis on effects distracts from other things that making arguments accomplishes and thus […]

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 Eighth Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Sic Sat.  Retrieved from http://rozenbergquarterly.com/issa-proceedings-2014-climate-scientist-stephen-schneider-versus-the-sceptics-a-case-study-of-argumentation-in-deep-disagreement/  Can deep disagreement be managed by argument? This case study examines the 2010 exchange between prominent […]

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. […]

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 […]