8 found
Order:
Disambiguations:
Daniel J. Hicks [5]Daniel Hicks [3]
See also:
Profile: Dan Hicks (American Association for the Advancement of Science, University of Western Ontario)
  1.  7
    Daniel J. Hicks & Thomas A. Stapleford, The Virtues of Scientific Practice: MacIntyre, Virtue Ethics, and the Historiography of Science.
    “Practice” has become a ubiquitous term in the history of science, and yet historians have not always reflected on its philosophical import and especially on its potential connections with ethics. In this essay, we draw on the work of the virtue ethicist Alasdair MacIntyre to develop a theory of “communal practices” and explore how such an approach can inform the history of science, including allegations about the corruption of science by wealth or power; consideration of scientific ethics or “moral economies”; (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  2.  49
    Daniel J. Hicks & John Milanese (2015). The Logic Game: A Two-Player Game of Propositional Logic. Teaching Philosophy 38 (1):77-93.
    This paper introduces The Logic Game, a two-player strategy game designed to help students in introductory logic classes learn the truth conditions for the logical operators. The game materials can be printed using an ordinary printer on ordinary paper, takes 10-15 minutes to play, and the rules are fairly easy to learn. This paper includes a complete set of rules, a URL for a website hosting all of the game materials, and the results of a study of the effectiveness of (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  3.  95
    Daniel Hicks (2011). Is Longino's Conception of Objectivity Feminist? Hypatia 26 (2):333-351.
    Helen Longino's account of objectivity has been highly regarded by both feminist and mainstream philosophers of science. However, I have encountered three feminist philosophers who have all offered one especially compelling feminist critique of Longino's view: far from vindicating or privileging the work of feminist scientists, Longino's account actually requires the active cultivation of anti-feminist and misogynist scientists to balance out the possibility of feminist bias. I call this objection the Nazi problem, for the particular version that claims that her (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  4.  25
    Daniel J. Hicks (2015). On Okin's Critique of Libertarianism. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 45 (1):37-57.
    Susan Moller Okin's critique of libertarianism in Justice, Gender, and the Family has received only slight attention in the libertarian literature. I find this neglect of Okin's argument surprising: The argument is straightforward and, if sound, it establishes a devastating conflict between the core libertarian notions of self-ownership and the acquisition of property through labour. In this paper, I first present a reconstruction of Okin's argument. In brief, she points out that mothers make children through their labour; thus it would (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  5.  13
    Daniel J. Hicks (2015). Epistemological Depth in a GM Crops Controversy. Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 50:1-12.
    This paper examines the scientific controversy over the yields of genetically modified [GM] crops as a case study in epistemologically deep disagreements. Appeals to “the evidence” are inadequate to resolve such disagreements; not because the interlocutors have radically different metaphysical views (as in cases of incommensurability), but instead because they assume rival epistemological frameworks and so have incompatible views about what kinds of research methods and claims count as evidence. Specifically, I show that, in the yield debate, proponents and opponents (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  6.  34
    Daniel Hicks (2012). Scientific Practices and Their Social Context. Dissertation, U. Of Notre Dame
    My dissertation combines philosophy of science and political philosophy. Drawing directly on the work of Alasdair MacIntyre and inspired by John Dewey, I develop two rival conceptions of scientific practice. I show that these rivals are closely linked to the two basic sides in the science and values debate -- the debate over the extent to which ethical and political values may legitimately influence scientific inquiry. Finally, I start to develop an account of justice that is sensitive to these legitimate (...)
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  7.  16
    Daniel Hicks (2013). Paul Pojman (Ed): Food Ethics, Wadsworth, Cengage Learning, Boston, Massachusetts, 2012, 199 Pp, ISBN 9781111772307 David Kaplan (Ed): The Philosophy of Food, University of California Press, Berkeley, California, 2012, 320 Pp, ISBN 9780520269330. [REVIEW] Agriculture and Human Values 30 (4):657-658.
    Both of the books reviewed here are anthologies edited by philosophers, intended for use in undergraduate “ethics of eating” classes taught under the auspices of philosophy departments; I review them as a teacher of such a class. The Pojman anthology is rather outdated, and not recommended. The Kaplan anthology, by contrast, would be a valuable starting point or addition to such a class, though it could not carry the class on its own.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  8.  2
    Daniel J. Hicks (2015). Epistemological Depth in a GM Crops Controversy. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 50:1-12.
    This paper examines the scientific controversy over the yields of genetically modified [GM] crops as a case study in epistemologically deep disagreements. Appeals to “the evidence” are inadequate to resolve such disagreements; not because the interlocutors have radically different metaphysical views (as in cases of incommensurability), but instead because they assume rival epistemological frameworks and so have incompatible views about what kinds of research methods and claims count as evidence. Specifically, I show that, in the yield debate, proponents and opponents (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography