Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM

Copy

Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.

DeleteCancel

איפה התכלס?

No description
by

O F

on 18 August 2016

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of איפה התכלס?

םיחוכיוב תופתתשה(-יא)
יעדמ עדי תודוא םיירוביצ
Ori Freiman
Graduate Program in Science, Technology and Society
Bar-Ilan University
ori.freiman@biu.ac.il
Given the opportunity,
do scholars have
a professional obligation
to get involved in
public controversies over what should count as science?
Unassailable Consensus
role of epistemic authority and underdogs
in constituting epistemic peerhood
normatively suggesting that current societal problems urge those who are involved in public controversies regarding science, and especially scientific knowledge, to do so not as individual observers and commentators, but as responsible, unionized, expert communities.
14/6
Expert witness for the plaintiffs in
McLean v. Arkansas (1982).
Michael Ruse
Steve Fuller
Defense witness at
Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005).
against
creationism
as science
Meta-scientists
should not
evaluate science according to the dominant
paradigm
Larry Laudan
Argument for refraining from
participation in cases like McLean.
Creationism
promotes
false belief
than
bad science
Ruse, Michael, ed. But is it Science?: The Philosophical Question in The Creation Evolution Controversy. New York: Prometheus Books, 1996.
Robert Pennock
Michigan State University
intelligent design is an updated form of creationism and not science
Myles Jackson
New-York University
Because Genes are scientific knowledge, they could not be patented
Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc (2013)
Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005)
Michael Lynch
vs. Ruse
vs. Fuller
Susan Haack. (2005). Trial and Error: The Supreme Court’s Philosophy of Science.
American Journal of Public Health
95(S1): S66-S73.
Daubert v Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc (1993)
US Supreme Court ran together Karl Popper's and Carl Hempel's incompatible philosophies of science
Edwards v. Aguillard (1987)
AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF OF 72 NOBEL LAUREATES, 17 STATE ACADEMIES OF SCIENCE,
AND 7 OTHER SCIENTIFIC ORGANIZATIONS, IN SUPPORT OF APPELLEES:
Creation science is composed of religious tenets
Jasanoff, S. (2009).
Science at the bar: Law, science, and technology in America.
Harvard University Press.
Lynch, Michael. (2009). Going public: a cautionary tale. Spontaneous Generations: A journal for the History and Philosophy of Science, 3(1), 213-219.
Pro-Action
Pre-Caution
Personal
Professional
Incentives
Societal Risks
Broadening
of the STS
agenda
How Courts
Handle Expert
Evidence
(De)Promoting
Philosophy
of Science
Democratizing
Technological
Culture
Layman
Reception
of the Experts’
Conclusions
Iconoclastic
Intellectual Radicalism
Unceasingly Misrepresented
Plural-Liberal
"providing an idea or theory that doesn’t conform to the standards of the day; that defies or contradicts the views of the so-called establishment" (Sassower 2014)
Sassower, Raphael. “Radical Public Intellectuals.” Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 4, no. 1 (2014): 57-63.
תולבוקמ תופקשהל דגנתמש ימ
Laudan's pessimistic approach
Laudan, L. (1982). Commentary: Science at the bar—causes for concern. Science, Technology & Human Values, 7(4), 16-19.
Building upon Chang's Scientific Pluralism
Iconoclastic
Intellectual Radicalism
Unceasingly Misrepresented
Plural-Liberal
Unassailable Consensus
Bijker, W. E. (2003). The Need for Public Intellectuals: A Space for STS Pre-Presidential Address, Annual Meeting 2001, Cambridge, MA.
Science, Technology & Human Values
28(4): 443-450.
?ס'לכתה הפיא
Quinn, Philip. 1984. The Philosopher of Science as Expert Witness. In
Science and Reality: Recent Work in the Philosophy of Science
, eds. James T. Cushing, Gary Gutting and C.F. Delany , 32–53. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
"effective
bad
arguments"
Philip L. Quinn
Frye standard
Daubert standard
I
won't
focus on...
scientific evidence presented to the court must be interpreted by the court as "generally accepted" by a meaningful segment of the associated scientific community
Frye v. United States (1980)
Iconoclastic
Intellectual Radicalism
Unceasingly Misrepresented
Plural-Liberal
Unassailable Consensus
ןובשחב תחקל תיביטמרונ תוביוחמ
Next Step: Matching ideologies with Philosophical positions
Next step: "Populating" the positions
e.g.:
Interview: Prof. Boaz Sangero, Academic Center of Law & Business, Israel
!הדות
and many more...!
Full transcript