<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Scientists Manques?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2007/05/scientists_manq.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2007/05/scientists_manq.html</link>
	<description>The Law, the Universe, and Everything</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 04:22:46 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.3</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: The Oracle of Syracuse</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2007/05/scientists_manq.html/comment-page-1#comment-54093</link>
		<dc:creator>The Oracle of Syracuse</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Oct 2008 20:36:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.solove.org/archives/2007/05/scientists-manques.html#comment-54093</guid>
		<description>I find the use of critical legal studies to show how an ostensibly objective school of legal thought is in reality a &quot;cloak&quot; for hidden &quot;ideological determinations&quot; to be deeply ironic to the point of self-parody.

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I find the use of critical legal studies to show how an ostensibly objective school of legal thought is in reality a &#8220;cloak&#8221; for hidden &#8220;ideological determinations&#8221; to be deeply ironic to the point of self-parody.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Patrick S. O'Donnell</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2007/05/scientists_manq.html/comment-page-1#comment-54092</link>
		<dc:creator>Patrick S. O'Donnell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 May 2007 01:03:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.solove.org/archives/2007/05/scientists-manques.html#comment-54092</guid>
		<description>The following list is from a larger compilation on the philosophy of science. I share several of Daniel&#039;s concerns and for some time now have been interested in questions surrounding the nature and methods of the natural and social sciences and the seductions of scientism. I&#039;ve left out classical works by Nagel, Hempel, Lakatos, Kuhn, and the like and of course there&#039;s no one viewpoint represented by these titles, but they should help one to gain some measure of clarity on the subject broached by Frank and further discussed by Daniel (without implying either one would endorse all the titles here or that we are all in agreement on identifiying the locus (or loci) of the problem(s), let alone on possible answers or solutions).

Barbour, Ian G. Myths, Models, and Paradigms. New York: Harper &amp; Row, 1974.

Brown, Theodore L. Making Truth: Metaphor in Science. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press, 2003.

Cartwright, Nancy. The Dappled World: A Study of the Boundaries of Science. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1999.

Cartwright, Nancy. How the Laws of Physics Lie. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 1983.

Cohen, I. Bernard. Interactions: Some Contacts Between the Natural Sciences and the Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1994.

Dupré, John. Human Nature and the Limits of Science. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press, 2001.

Elster, Jon. Nuts and Bolts for the Social Sciences. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1989.

Fuller, Steve. The Governance of Science. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press, 2000.

Fuller, Steve. Philosophy of Science and Its Discontents. New York: The Guilford Press, Second ed., 1993.

Fuller, Steve. Science. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 1997.

Fuller, Steve. Social Epistemology. Bloomington, IN: University of Indiana Press, 1988.

Giere, Ronald N. Science without Laws. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1999.

Goldman, Alvin. Knowledge in a Social World. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.

Hallyn, Fernand, ed. Metaphor and Analogy in the Sciences. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publ., 2000.

Hesse, Mary. Revolutions and Reconstructions in the Philosophy of Science. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1980.

Keller, Evelyn Fox. Making Sense of Life: Explaining Biological Development with Models, Metaphors, and Machines. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2002.

Kincaid, Harold. Philosophical Foundations of the Social Sciences. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1996.

Kitcher, Philip. The Advancement of Science: Science without Legend, Objectivity without Illusions. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 1993.

Kitcher, Philip. In Mendel’s Mirror: Philosophical Reflections on Biology. New York: Oxford University Press, 2003.

Kitcher, Philip. Science, Truth, and Democracy. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2001.

Kitcher, Philip. Vaulting Ambition: Sociobiology and the Quest for Human Nature. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1985.

Lewontin, Richard. Biology as Ideology. New York: HarperPerennial, 1991.

Lewontin, Richard. It Ain’t Necessarily So: The Dream of the Human Genome and Other Illusions. New York: New York Review Books, 2000.

Longino, Helen E. The Fate of Knowledge. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2002.

Longino, Helen E. Science as Social Knowledge: Values and Objectivity in Scientific Inquiry. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1990.

McCloskey, Donald N. Knowledge and Persuasion in Economics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1994.

Miller, Richard W. Fact and Method: Explanation, Confirmation and Reality in the Natural and Social Sciences. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1987.

Mirowski, Philip. Machine Dreams: Economics Becomes a Cyborg Science. Cambridge, UK:  Cambridge University Press, 2002.

Newell, R.W. Objectivity, Empiricism and Truth. London: Routledge &amp; Kegan Paul, 1986.

Rescher, Nicholas. The Limits of Science. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1984.

Rescher, Nicholas. Nature and Understanding: The Metaphysics and Method of Science. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press, 2000.

Shapiro, Ian. The Flight from Reality in the Human Sciences. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2005.

Toulmin, Stephen. Foresight &amp; Understanding: An Inquiry into the Aims of Science. New York: Harpercollins, 1980.

van Fraassen, Bas C. The Empirical Stance. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2002.

Ziman, John. Real Science: What It Is, and What It Means. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2000.

And two important articles by John D. Norton, both of which should be available at his webpage in the Dept. of History and Philosophy of Science at the University of Pittsburgh: &#039;A Material Theory of Induction&#039; (2003), and &#039;A Little Survey of Induction, (2003).

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The following list is from a larger compilation on the philosophy of science. I share several of Daniel&#8217;s concerns and for some time now have been interested in questions surrounding the nature and methods of the natural and social sciences and the seductions of scientism. I&#8217;ve left out classical works by Nagel, Hempel, Lakatos, Kuhn, and the like and of course there&#8217;s no one viewpoint represented by these titles, but they should help one to gain some measure of clarity on the subject broached by Frank and further discussed by Daniel (without implying either one would endorse all the titles here or that we are all in agreement on identifiying the locus (or loci) of the problem(s), let alone on possible answers or solutions).</p>
<p>Barbour, Ian G. Myths, Models, and Paradigms. New York: Harper &#038; Row, 1974.</p>
<p>Brown, Theodore L. Making Truth: Metaphor in Science. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press, 2003.</p>
<p>Cartwright, Nancy. The Dappled World: A Study of the Boundaries of Science. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1999.</p>
<p>Cartwright, Nancy. How the Laws of Physics Lie. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 1983.</p>
<p>Cohen, I. Bernard. Interactions: Some Contacts Between the Natural Sciences and the Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1994.</p>
<p>Dupré, John. Human Nature and the Limits of Science. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press, 2001.</p>
<p>Elster, Jon. Nuts and Bolts for the Social Sciences. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1989.</p>
<p>Fuller, Steve. The Governance of Science. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press, 2000.</p>
<p>Fuller, Steve. Philosophy of Science and Its Discontents. New York: The Guilford Press, Second ed., 1993.</p>
<p>Fuller, Steve. Science. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 1997.</p>
<p>Fuller, Steve. Social Epistemology. Bloomington, IN: University of Indiana Press, 1988.</p>
<p>Giere, Ronald N. Science without Laws. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1999.</p>
<p>Goldman, Alvin. Knowledge in a Social World. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.</p>
<p>Hallyn, Fernand, ed. Metaphor and Analogy in the Sciences. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publ., 2000.</p>
<p>Hesse, Mary. Revolutions and Reconstructions in the Philosophy of Science. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1980.</p>
<p>Keller, Evelyn Fox. Making Sense of Life: Explaining Biological Development with Models, Metaphors, and Machines. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2002.</p>
<p>Kincaid, Harold. Philosophical Foundations of the Social Sciences. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1996.</p>
<p>Kitcher, Philip. The Advancement of Science: Science without Legend, Objectivity without Illusions. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 1993.</p>
<p>Kitcher, Philip. In Mendel’s Mirror: Philosophical Reflections on Biology. New York: Oxford University Press, 2003.</p>
<p>Kitcher, Philip. Science, Truth, and Democracy. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2001.</p>
<p>Kitcher, Philip. Vaulting Ambition: Sociobiology and the Quest for Human Nature. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1985.</p>
<p>Lewontin, Richard. Biology as Ideology. New York: HarperPerennial, 1991.</p>
<p>Lewontin, Richard. It Ain’t Necessarily So: The Dream of the Human Genome and Other Illusions. New York: New York Review Books, 2000.</p>
<p>Longino, Helen E. The Fate of Knowledge. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2002.</p>
<p>Longino, Helen E. Science as Social Knowledge: Values and Objectivity in Scientific Inquiry. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1990.</p>
<p>McCloskey, Donald N. Knowledge and Persuasion in Economics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1994.</p>
<p>Miller, Richard W. Fact and Method: Explanation, Confirmation and Reality in the Natural and Social Sciences. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1987.</p>
<p>Mirowski, Philip. Machine Dreams: Economics Becomes a Cyborg Science. Cambridge, UK:  Cambridge University Press, 2002.</p>
<p>Newell, R.W. Objectivity, Empiricism and Truth. London: Routledge &#038; Kegan Paul, 1986.</p>
<p>Rescher, Nicholas. The Limits of Science. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1984.</p>
<p>Rescher, Nicholas. Nature and Understanding: The Metaphysics and Method of Science. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press, 2000.</p>
<p>Shapiro, Ian. The Flight from Reality in the Human Sciences. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2005.</p>
<p>Toulmin, Stephen. Foresight &#038; Understanding: An Inquiry into the Aims of Science. New York: Harpercollins, 1980.</p>
<p>van Fraassen, Bas C. The Empirical Stance. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2002.</p>
<p>Ziman, John. Real Science: What It Is, and What It Means. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2000.</p>
<p>And two important articles by John D. Norton, both of which should be available at his webpage in the Dept. of History and Philosophy of Science at the University of Pittsburgh: &#8216;A Material Theory of Induction&#8217; (2003), and &#8216;A Little Survey of Induction, (2003).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Daniel Goldberg</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2007/05/scientists_manq.html/comment-page-1#comment-54091</link>
		<dc:creator>Daniel Goldberg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 May 2007 23:06:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.solove.org/archives/2007/05/scientists-manques.html#comment-54091</guid>
		<description>Hey Frank,

I sent a trackback but just wanted to let you know my thoughts on this post are here:

http://www.medhumanities.org/2007/05/on_scientism.html

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Frank,</p>
<p>I sent a trackback but just wanted to let you know my thoughts on this post are here:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.medhumanities.org/2007/05/on_scientism.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.medhumanities.org/2007/05/on_scientism.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: greglas</title>
		<link>http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2007/05/scientists_manq.html/comment-page-1#comment-54090</link>
		<dc:creator>greglas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 May 2007 20:13:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.solove.org/archives/2007/05/scientists-manques.html#comment-54090</guid>
		<description>Great post, Frank -- and I&#039;m looking forward to your ideas on positional goods.

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great post, Frank &#8212; and I&#8217;m looking forward to your ideas on positional goods.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
