Quibbling and the Fallacy of Critical Scholarship: Response to Thorstensen

NanoEthics 8 (3):251-254 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In this text, I respond to a paper by Erik Thorstensen entitled “Public Involvement and Narrative Fallacies of Nanotechnologies.” In his paper, Thorstensen critically reviews a previous ELSA project on engagement and nanotechnology known by the acronym DEEPEN. While I agree that the ELSA community could benefit from the critical examination of earlier research, I believe the approach taken by Thorstensen is not a constructive one. My response deals with three main issues: the character of the paper, narrative theory, and interdisciplinarity

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,219

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Final response to Collin’s response.Gregory J. Feist - 2013 - Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 12 (2):417-418.
The narratology of lay ethics.Jean-Pierre Dupuy - 2010 - NanoEthics 4 (2):153-170.
Response: Disciplining Interdisciplinarity.Cindi Katz - 2001 - Feminist Studies 27 (2):519.
How and Why to Teach Interdisciplinary Research Practice.Rick Szostak - 2007 - Journal of Research Practice 3 (2):Article M17.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-11-10

Downloads
22 (#669,532)

6 months
2 (#1,157,335)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?