Science, Assertion, and the Common Ground

Publikation: Beitrag in FachzeitschriftArtikelForschungPeer-Review

Autoren

  • Corey Nathaniel Dethier
Forschungs-netzwerk anzeigen

Details

OriginalspracheEnglisch
Aufsatznummer30
FachzeitschriftSynthese
Jahrgang200
Ausgabenummer1
PublikationsstatusVeröffentlicht - 23 Feb. 2022

Abstract

I argue that the appropriateness of an assertion is sensitive to context—or, really, the “common ground”—in a way that hasn’t previously been emphasized by philosophers. This kind of context-sensitivity explains why some scientific conclusions seem to be appropriately asserted even though they are not known, believed, or justified on the available evidence. I then consider other recent attempts to account for this phenomenon and argue that if they are to be successful, they need to recognize the kind of context-sensitivity that I argue for.

ASJC Scopus Sachgebiete

Zitieren

Science, Assertion, and the Common Ground. / Dethier, Corey Nathaniel.
in: Synthese, Jahrgang 200, Nr. 1, 30, 23.02.2022.

Publikation: Beitrag in FachzeitschriftArtikelForschungPeer-Review

Dethier CN. Science, Assertion, and the Common Ground. Synthese. 2022 Feb 23;200(1):30. doi: 10.1007/s11229-022-03580-7
Dethier, Corey Nathaniel. / Science, Assertion, and the Common Ground. in: Synthese. 2022 ; Jahrgang 200, Nr. 1.
Download
@article{bd03a834116a42d5a3564c6404a08956,
title = "Science, Assertion, and the Common Ground",
abstract = "I argue that the appropriateness of an assertion is sensitive to context—or, really, the “common ground”—in a way that hasn{\textquoteright}t previously been emphasized by philosophers. This kind of context-sensitivity explains why some scientific conclusions seem to be appropriately asserted even though they are not known, believed, or justified on the available evidence. I then consider other recent attempts to account for this phenomenon and argue that if they are to be successful, they need to recognize the kind of context-sensitivity that I argue for.",
keywords = "Assertion, Common ground, Context, Norm of assertion, Science communication, Social epistemology of science",
author = "Dethier, {Corey Nathaniel}",
note = "Funding Information: Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL. Funding for this paper was provided by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) - Project 254954344/GRK2073. I would like to thank Haixin Dang, Liam Kofi Bright, and two anonymous reviewers for constructive comments on an earlier version of this paper. The paper also benefited from an audience at Liebniz Universit?t Hannover as well as conversations with Will Fleisher, Samia Hensi, and Mack Sullivan.",
year = "2022",
month = feb,
day = "23",
doi = "10.1007/s11229-022-03580-7",
language = "English",
volume = "200",
journal = "Synthese",
issn = "0039-7857",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",
number = "1",

}

Download

TY - JOUR

T1 - Science, Assertion, and the Common Ground

AU - Dethier, Corey Nathaniel

N1 - Funding Information: Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL. Funding for this paper was provided by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) - Project 254954344/GRK2073. I would like to thank Haixin Dang, Liam Kofi Bright, and two anonymous reviewers for constructive comments on an earlier version of this paper. The paper also benefited from an audience at Liebniz Universit?t Hannover as well as conversations with Will Fleisher, Samia Hensi, and Mack Sullivan.

PY - 2022/2/23

Y1 - 2022/2/23

N2 - I argue that the appropriateness of an assertion is sensitive to context—or, really, the “common ground”—in a way that hasn’t previously been emphasized by philosophers. This kind of context-sensitivity explains why some scientific conclusions seem to be appropriately asserted even though they are not known, believed, or justified on the available evidence. I then consider other recent attempts to account for this phenomenon and argue that if they are to be successful, they need to recognize the kind of context-sensitivity that I argue for.

AB - I argue that the appropriateness of an assertion is sensitive to context—or, really, the “common ground”—in a way that hasn’t previously been emphasized by philosophers. This kind of context-sensitivity explains why some scientific conclusions seem to be appropriately asserted even though they are not known, believed, or justified on the available evidence. I then consider other recent attempts to account for this phenomenon and argue that if they are to be successful, they need to recognize the kind of context-sensitivity that I argue for.

KW - Assertion

KW - Common ground

KW - Context

KW - Norm of assertion

KW - Science communication

KW - Social epistemology of science

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85125454778&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s11229-022-03580-7

DO - 10.1007/s11229-022-03580-7

M3 - Article

VL - 200

JO - Synthese

JF - Synthese

SN - 0039-7857

IS - 1

M1 - 30

ER -