Mixed feelings about science literacy outreach, part 2
As much as it annoys me, I can’t bring myself to complain too much about Marcelo Gleiser’s short essay: This shaping of our worldview is not restric...
Category: STS
Affirming values and convincing scientists
If the implication, the outcome, can affirm your values, you think about it in a much more open-minded way–Dan Kahan (~3-minute mark) While Kahan was addr...
Science changes in response to economic pressures
To finally talk about something other than basic and applied research (although I’ll shortly return to the topic!), I strongly recommend this interview wi...
The fallacy of attribution
I think, on some level, when we marvel at how the world has become more egalitarian, we think about King and Lincoln. But do we think about that changes relatio...
The social relevance of history and philosophy of science
Over at The Bubble Chamber, they’re having a spirited discussion on the (possible!) social relevance of history and philosophy of science. I’ve sup...
How to think about science
Via Matt Nesbit (in a post I’ll also try to comment on in my 3-day blogging rampage), I’d like to draw your attention to a wonderful series “H...
The virtue of mundane arguments*
Let me expand on an idea I started a couple posts ago, namely that the mundane is always sacrificed for the sexy. Put another way, all discussions about scienc...
Against hypocrisy
A couple months ago I was a bit too glib in some of my writing on basic research. From my comment on Ryan’s blog: I think it’s perfectly understandable a...
Scientists and philosophers should hang out more
I’ve just started reading The Disunity of Science. It’s pretty dense so far, and I probably won’t get through the all the essays. But this, ...
A mild defense of Chris Mooney’s war on science
David Bruggeman recently attacked Chris Mooney yet again for promoting the war on science meme: the concept is meaningless, incoherent, oversimplified, etc. D...