David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophy of the Social Sciences 33 (3):339-350 (2003)
Deviant forms of human thought may provide insight into epistemic standards, such as rationality. A comparative analysis of paranoia and reinforced dogmatism suggests that reinforced dogmatism, such as pseudo-science a-la-Popper, demonstrates a primary epistemic lack of critical rationality, that is, of testability, whereas paranoia demonstrates a lack of range of alternative statements leading secondarily to a lack of testability. This reflects the importance to both epistemology and psychiatry of epistemic standards in addition to testability, such as relevance to problems, and emphasizes the distinction of the context of introduction from the contexts of discovery and of justification. Key Words: context of introduction paranoia reinforced dogmatism relevance testability.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Abraham Rudnick (2012). A Philosophical Analysis of the General Methodology of Qualitative Research: A Critical Rationalist Perspective. [REVIEW] Health Care Analysis 22 (3):1-10.
Similar books and articles
David R. Hiley (1979). Relativism, Dogmatism, and Rationality. International Philosophical Quarterly 19 (2):133-149.
Roger White (2006). Problems for Dogmatism. Philosophical Studies 131 (3):525--57.
Chris Tucker (2010). Why Open-Minded People Should Endorse Dogmatism. Philosophical Perspectives 24 (1):529-545.
Howard Rachlin (2002). Altruism is a Form of Self-Control. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (2):284-291.
Adam Leite (2011). Immediate Warrant, Epistemic Responsibility, and Moorean Dogmatism. In Andrew Reisner & Asbjørn Steglich-Petersen (eds.), Reasons for Belief. Cambridge University Press.
Danny Frederick (2013). Popper, Rationality and the Possibility of Social Science. Theoria 28 (1):61-75.
Darrell P. Rowbottom (2011). Popper's Critical Rationalism: A Philosophical Investigation. Routledge.
Thomas Kelly (2007). Evidence and Normativity: Reply to Leite. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 75 (2):465–474.
Sherrilyn Roush (2005). Testability and Candor. Synthese 145 (2):233 - 275.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads3 ( #297,395 of 1,102,721 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #296,833 of 1,102,721 )
How can I increase my downloads?