science communication | Jean Goodwin

Browsing All posts tagged under »science communication«

Sophistical refutations in the climate change debates.

February 19, 2019

Goodwin, Jean. (2019). Sophistical refutations in the climate change debates. Journal of Argumentation in Context 8:1, 40–64. https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.18008.goo A case study of a short televised debate between a climate scientist and an advocate for climate skepticism provides the basis for developing a contemporary conception of sophistry. The sophist has a high degree of argumentative content […]

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

October 13, 2018

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

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 […]

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

January 22, 2016

Goodwin, Jean. (Forthcoming, 2018) 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

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

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

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. […]