Browsing All posts tagged under »climate change«

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 […]

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.

Good reasons for trusting climate science communication

July 14, 2012

0

Scientists can earn trust--but only by making themselves vulnerable.

The authority of the IPCC First Assessment Report and the manufacture of consensus

July 14, 2012

0

"Consensus" as the strategy selected by scientists associated with the IPCC--a poor rhetorical choice.

Maslin v. Morano

July 14, 2012

0

In a close textual analysis of a short debate, I show how an outstanding scientist is unable to simultaneously exert his authority and to advocate effectively--especially when up against an outstanding advocate on the other side.