Episteme 2 (3):189-201 (2006)
AbstractScientific research is reconstructed as a language game along the lines of Robert Brandom's inferentialism. Researchers are assumed to aim at persuading their colleagues of the validity of some claims. The assertions each scientist is allowed or committed to make depend on her previous claims and on the inferential norms of her research community. A classification of the most relevant types of inferential rules governing such a game is offered, and some ways in which this inferentialist approach can be used for assessing scientific knowledge and practices are explored. Some similarities and differences with a game-theoretic analysis are discussed
Similar books and articles
The Typology of the Game That American, British, and Danish Crop and Plant Scientists Play.Mercy W. Kamara - 2009 - Minerva 47 (4):441-463.
Pragmatism and Inferentialism.John MacFarlane - 2010 - In Bernhard Weiss & Jeremy Wanderer (eds.), Reading Brandom: On Making It Explici. Routledge. pp. 81--95.
Meaning and Testability in the Structuralist Theory of Science.Jesús P. Zamora Bonilla - 2003 - Erkenntnis 59 (1):47 - 76.
How to Play the Ultimatum Game: An Engineering Approach to Metanormativity.Benoit Hardy-Vallée & Paul Thagard - 2008 - Philosophical Psychology 21 (2):173 – 192.
Scientific Inference and the Pursuit of Fame: A Contractarian Approach.Jesús P. Zamora Bonilla - 2002 - Philosophy of Science 69 (2):300-323.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Inconsistent Idealizations and Inferentialism About Scientific Representation.Peter Tan - 2021 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 89:11-18.
Who’s Afraid of Adversariality? Conflict and Cooperation in Argumentation.Catarina Dutilh Novaes - 2020 - Topoi 40 (5):873-886.
The Nature of Co-Authorship: A Note on Recognition Sharing and Scientific Argumentation.Jesús Zamora Bonilla - 2014 - Synthese 191 (1):97-108.
The Nature of Co-Authorship: A Note on Recognition Sharing and Scientific Argumentation.Jesús Zamora Bonilla - 2012 - Synthese (1):1-12.
Scientific Controversies and the Ethics of Arguing and Belief in the Face of Rational Disagreement.Xavier de Donato Rodríguez & Jesús Zamora Bonilla - 2014 - Argumentation 28 (1):39-65.
References found in this work
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.Thomas Samuel Kuhn - 1962 - Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Making It Explicit: Reasoning, Representing, and Discursive Commitment.Robert Brandom - 1994 - Harvard University Press.
The Advancement of Science: Science Without Legend, Objectivity Without Illusions.Philip Kitcher - 1993 - Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
The Dappled World: A Study of the Boundaries of Science.Nancy Cartwright - 1999 - Cambridge University Press.