Results for 'Scientists'

1000+ found
Order:
  1.  40
    How Scientists Explain Disease.Paul Thagard - 1999 - Princeton University Press.
    "This is a wonderful book! In "How Scientists Explain Disease," Paul Thagard offers us a delightful essay combining science, its history, philosophy, and sociology.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   85 citations  
  2. Should Scientists Embrace Scientific Realism or Antirealism?Seungbae Park - 2019 - Philosophical Forum 50 (1):147-158.
    If scientists embrace scientific realism, they can use a scientific theory to explain and predict observables and unobservables. If, however, they embrace scientific antirealism, they cannot use a scientific theory to explain observables and unobservables, and cannot use a scientific theory to predict unobservables. Given that explanation and prediction are means to make scientific progress, scientists can make more scientific progress, if they embrace scientific realism than if they embrace scientific antirealism.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  3.  67
    Scientists’ Attitudes on Science and Values: Case Studies and Survey Methods in Philosophy of Science.Daniel Steel, Chad Gonnerman & Michael O'Rourke - 2017 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 63:22-30.
    This article examines the relevance of survey data of scientists’ attitudes about science and values to case studies in philosophy of science. We describe two methodological challenges confronting such case studies: 1) small samples, and 2) potential for bias in selection, emphasis, and interpretation. Examples are given to illustrate that these challenges can arise for case studies in the science and values literature. We propose that these challenges can be mitigated through an approach in which case studies and survey (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  4.  24
    Scientists Admitting to Plagiarism: A Meta-Analysis of Surveys.Vanja Pupovac & Daniele Fanelli - 2015 - Science and Engineering Ethics 21 (5):1331-1352.
    We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of anonymous surveys asking scientists whether they ever committed various forms of plagiarism. From May to December 2011 we searched 35 bibliographic databases, five grey literature databases and hand searched nine journals for potentially relevant studies. We included surveys that asked scientists if, in a given recall period, they had committed or knew of a colleague who committed plagiarism, and from each survey extracted the proportion of those who reported at least (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations  
  5.  11
    Scientists Reach 100% Consensus on Anthropogenic Global Warming.James Powell - 2017 - Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society 37 (4):183-184.
    The consensus among research scientists on anthropogenic global warming has grown to 100%, based on a review of 11,602 peer-reviewed articles on “climate change” and “global warming” published in the first 7 months of 2019.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  6. What Scientists Know Is Not a Function of What Scientists Know.P. D. Magnus - 2013 - Philosophy of Science 80 (5):840-849.
    There are two senses of ‘what scientists know’: An individual sense (the separate opinions of individual scientists) and a collective sense (the state of the discipline). The latter is what matters for policy and planning, but it is not something that can be directly observed or reported. A function can be defined to map individual judgments onto an aggregate judgment. I argue that such a function cannot effectively capture community opinion, especially in cases that matter to us.
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  7. Getting Scientists to Think About What They Are Doing.John Ziman - 2001 - Science and Engineering Ethics 7 (2):165-176.
    Research scientists are trained to produce specialised bricks of knowledge, but not to look at the whole building. Increasing public concern about the social role of science is forcing science students to think about what they are actually learning to do. What sort of knowledge will they be producing, and how will it be used? Science education now requires serious consideration of these philosophical and ethical questions. But the many different forms of knowledge produced by modern science cannot be (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  8.  21
    Scientists’ Conceptions of Good Research Practice.Nora Hangel & Jutta Schickore - 2017 - Perspectives on Science 25 (6):766-791.
    In a recent editorial published in Nature, the journal's editors comment on a new automated software that has been used to check findings in psychology publications. The editors express concern with the way in which the anonymous fact-checkers have proceeded, but at the same time, they underscore the crucial role of peer criticism for scientific progress and insist: "self-correction is at the heart of science." Brief as it is, the editorial showcases that peer criticism and the application of norms of (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  9. Scientists as Experts: A Distinct Role?Torbjørn Gundersen - 2018 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 69:52-59.
    The role of scientists as experts is crucial to public policymaking. However, the expert role is contested and unsettled in both public and scholarly discourse. In this paper, I provide a systematic account of the role of scientists as experts in policymaking by examining whether there are any normatively relevant differences between this role and the role of scientists as researchers. Two different interpretations can be given of how the two roles relate to each other. The separability (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  10.  50
    Can Scientists Regulate the Publication of Dual Use Research?David B. Resnik - 2010 - Law and Ethics of Human Rights 4 (1).
    The growing threat of the misuse of science and technology for terrorist or criminal purposes has led scientists, institutions, professional organizations, funding agencies, journals, and governments to consider how best to control research that can be readily used to cause significant harm to public health, the economy, the environment, or national security, also known as dual use research. This commentary argues that scientists can regulate dual use research, provided that they are committed to developing effective dual use policies (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  11. Scientists' Thoughts on Scientific Models.Daniela M. Bailer-Jones - 2002 - Perspectives on Science 10 (3):275-301.
    : This paper contains the analysis of nine interviews with UK scientists on the topic of scientific models. Scientific models are an important, very controversially discussed topic in philosophy of science. A reasonable expectation is that philosophical conceptions of models ought to be in agreement with scientific practice. Questioning practicing scientists on their use of and views on models provides material against which philosophical positions can be measured.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   19 citations  
  12.  13
    Scientists’ Ethical Obligations and Social Responsibility for Nanotechnology Research.Elizabeth A. Corley, Youngjae Kim & Dietram A. Scheufele - 2016 - Science and Engineering Ethics 22 (1):111-132.
    Scientists’ sense of social responsibility is particularly relevant for emerging technologies. Since a regulatory vacuum can sometimes occur in the early stages of these technologies, individual scientists’ social responsibility might be one of the most significant checks on the risks and negative consequences of this scientific research. In this article, we analyze data from a 2011 mail survey of leading U.S. nanoscientists to explore their perceptions the regarding social and ethical responsibilities for their nanotechnology research. Our analyses show (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  13.  41
    Scientists' Argumentative Reasoning.Hugo Mercier & Christophe Heintz - 2014 - Topoi 33 (2):513-524.
    Reasoning, defined as the production and evaluation of reasons, is a central process in science. The dominant view of reasoning, both in the psychology of reasoning and in the psychology of science, is of a mechanism with an asocial function: bettering the beliefs of the lone reasoner. Many observations, however, are difficult to reconcile with this view of reasoning; in particular, reasoning systematically searches for reasons that support the reasoner’s initial beliefs, and it only evaluates these reasons cursorily. By contrast, (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  14.  4
    Scientists as Political Experts: Atomic Scientists and Their Claims for Expertise on International Relations, 1945–1947.S. Waqar H. Zaidi - 2021 - Centaurus 63 (1):17-31.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  15. How Scientists Think: On-Line Creativity and Conceptual Change in Science.Kevin Dunbar - 1997 - In T. B. Ward, S. M. Smith & J. Viad (eds.), Creative Thought: An Investigation of Conceptual Structures and Processes. American Psychological Association. pp. 461--493.
  16.  8
    Scientists’ Understandings of Risk of Nanomaterials: Disciplinary Culture Through the Ethnographic Lens.Mikael Johansson & Åsa Boholm - 2017 - NanoEthics 11 (3):229-242.
    There is a growing literature on how scientific experts understand risk of technology related to their disciplinary field. Previous research shows that experts have different understandings and perspectives depending on disciplinary culture, organizational affiliation, and how they more broadly look upon their role in society. From a practice-based perspective on risk management as a bottom-up activity embedded in work place routines and everyday interactions, we look, through an ethnographic lens, at the laboratory life of nanoscientists. In the USA and Sweden, (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  17.  38
    Scientists’ Use of Diagrams in Developing Mechanistic Explanations: A Case Study From Chronobiology.Daniel C. Burnston, Benjamin Sheredos, Adele Abrahamsen & William Bechtel - 2014 - Pragmatics and Cognition 22 (2):224-243.
    We explore the crucial role of diagrams in scientific reasoning, especially reasoning directed at developing mechanistic explanations of biological phenomena. We offer a case study focusing on one research project that resulted in a published paper advancing a new understanding of the mechanism by which the central circadian oscillator in Synechococcus elongatus controls gene expression. By examining how the diagrams prepared for the paper developed over the course of multiple drafts, we show how the process of generating a new explanation (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  18. Are Scientists Right and Non-Scientists Wrong? Reflections on Discussions of GM.Jan Deckers - 2005 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 18 (5):451-478.
    The aim of this article is to further our understanding of the “GM is unnatural” view, and of the critical response to it. While many people have been reported to hold the view that GM is unnatural, many policy-makers and their advisors have suggested that the view must be ignored or rejected, and that there are scientific reasons for doing so. Three “typical” examples of ways in which the “GM is unnatural” view has been treated by UK policy-makers and their (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  19.  6
    Scientists Still Behaving Badly? A Survey Within Industry and Universities.Simon Godecharle, Steffen Fieuws, Ben Nemery & Kris Dierickx - 2018 - Science and Engineering Ethics 24 (6):1697-1717.
    Little is known about research misconduct within industry and how it compares to universities, even though a lot of biomedical research is performed by–or in collaboration with–commercial entities. Therefore, we sent an e-mail invitation to participate in an anonymous computer-based survey to all university researchers having received a biomedical research grant or scholarship from one of the two national academic research funders of Belgium between 2010 and 2014, and to researchers working in large biomedical companies or spin-offs in Belgium. The (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  20.  52
    Entrepreneurial Scientists and Entrepreneurial Universities in American Academic Science.Henry Etzkowitz - 1983 - Minerva 21 (2-3):198-233.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   21 citations  
  21.  6
    Bioethicists Should Be Helping Scientists Think About Race.Camisha Russell - forthcoming - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry:1-3.
    In this essay, I argue that bioethicists have a thus-far unfulfilled role to play in helping life scientists, including medical doctors and researchers, think about race. I begin with descriptions of how life scientists tend to think about race and descriptions of typical approaches to bioethics. I then describe three different approaches to race: biological race, race as social construction, and race as cultural driver of history. Taking into account the historical and contemporary interplay of these three approaches, (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  22. Why Scientists Should Cooperate with Journalists.Boyce Rensberger - 2000 - Science and Engineering Ethics 6 (4):549-552.
    Despite a widespread impression that the public is woefully ignorant of science and cares little for the subject, U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) surveys show the majority are very interested and understand that they are not well informed about science. The data are consistent with the author’s view that the popularity of pseudoscience does not indicate a rejection of science. If this is so, opportunities for scientists to communicate with the public promise a more rewarding result than is commonly (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  23.  14
    The Scientists Think and the Public Feels.Guy Cook, Elisa Pieri & Peter T. Robbins - 2004 - Discourse Society 15 (4):433-49.
    Debates about new technologies, such as crop and food genetic modification, raise pressing questions about the ways ‘experts’ and ‘ nonexperts’ communicate. These debates are dynamic, characterized by many voices contesting numerous storylines. The discoursal features, including language choices and communication strategies, of the GM debate are in some ways taken for granted and in others actively manipulated by participants. Although there are many voices, some have more influence than others. This study makes use of 50 hours of in-depth interviews (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  24.  21
    Scientists' Perspectives on the Deliberate Release of GM Crops.Valborg Kvakkestad, Froydis Gillund, Kamilla Anette Kjolberg & Arild Vatn - 2007 - Environmental Values 16 (1):79-104.
    In this paper we analyse scientists' perspectives on the release of genetically modified crops into the environment, and the relationship between their perspectives and the context that they work within, e.g. their place of employment, funding of their research and their disciplinary background. We employed Q-methodology to examine these issues. Two distinct factors were identified by interviewing 62 scientists. These two factors included 92 per cent of the sample. Scientists in factor 1 had a moderately negative attitude (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  25. 1,500 Scientists Lift the Lid on Reproducibility.M. Baker - 2016 - Nature 533 (7604):452-454.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   34 citations  
  26.  18
    Tactless Scientists: Ignoring Touch in the Study of Joint Attention.Maria Botero - 2016 - Philosophical Psychology 29 (8):1200-1214.
    Since the 1970s, researchers have focused on visual joint attention as a way to observe and operationalize joint attention. I will argue that this methodological choice has neglected other modalities and as a consequence might be missing important elements in the account of the development of JA and the evolutionary history of JA. I argue that by including other modes of interaction, such as touch, we open the possibility of finding that non-human primates and younger human infants engage in basic (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  27.  7
    The Scientists Think and the Public Feels : Expert Perceptions of the Discourse of GM Food.Guy Cook, Elisa Pieri & Peter T. Robbins - 2004 - .
    Debates about new technologies, such as crop and food genetic modification, raise pressing questions about the ways ‘experts’ and ‘ nonexperts’ communicate. These debates are dynamic, characterized by many voices contesting numerous storylines. The discoursal features, including language choices and communication strategies, of the GM debate are in some ways taken for granted and in others actively manipulated by participants. Although there are many voices, some have more influence than others. This study makes use of 50 hours of in-depth interviews (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  28.  3
    : British Scientists and the Concept of in the Inter-War Period.Gavin Schaffer - 2005 - British Journal for the History of Science 38 (3):307.
    Historians of science have often presented the inter-war period as a time when British scientific communities radically questioned existing scholarship on ‘race’. The ascendancy of genetics, and the perceived need to challenge Nazi ‘racial’ theory have been highlighted as pivotal issues in shaping this British revision of ‘racial’ ideas. This article offers a detailed analysis of British scientific thinking in the inter-war period. It questions whether historians have exaggerated or oversimplified the prevalence of anti-‘racial’ reform. It uses a wide range (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  29. Understanding Scientists' Computational Modeling Decisions About Climate Risk Management Strategies Using Values-Informed Mental Models.Lauren Mayer, Kathleen Loa, Bryan Cwik, Nancy Tuana, Klaus Keller, Chad Gonnerman, Andrew Parker & Robert Lempert - 2017 - Global Environmental Change 42:107-116.
    When developing computational models to analyze the tradeoffs between climate risk management strategies (i.e., mitigation, adaptation, or geoengineering), scientists make explicit and implicit decisions that are influenced by their beliefs, values and preferences. Model descriptions typically include only the explicit decisions and are silent on value judgments that may explain these decisions. Eliciting scientists’ mental models, a systematic approach to determining how they think about climate risk management, can help to gain a clearer understanding of their modeling decisions. (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  30.  18
    Scientists and Bureaucrats in the Establishment of the John Innes Horticultural Institution Under William Bateson.Robert Olby - 1989 - Annals of Science 46 (5):497-510.
    Research in Mendelian heredity was first given permanent institutional support in the U.K. at the John Innes Horticultural Institution. The path by which this was achieved is described. It is shown that Brooke-Hunt in the Board of Agriculture played a decisive part in redirecting the John Innes Bequest from a school for gardeners as intended by the testator to an institute given to research on plants of importance to the horticultural trade. The choice of William Bateson as the institute's first (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   18 citations  
  31.  8
    What Are Clinician Scientists Expected to Do? The Undefined Space for Professionalizable Work in Translational Biomedicine.Barbara Hendriks, Arno Simons & Martin Reinhart - 2019 - Minerva 57 (2):219-237.
    Clinician scientists have gained institutional support in the era of translational research, as the key solution to closing the ‘translational gap’ between biomedical research and medical practice. However, clinician scientists remain an ‘endangered species’ in search of a secure niche, while new grants and training programs attempt to counteract their measurable decline in numbers over the past decades. Our study asks how an occupational space for clinician scientists is currently situated between the politics of translation, professional dynamics, (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  32.  57
    Mad Scientists or Unreliable Autobiographers? Dopamine Dysregulation and Delusion.Philip Gerrans - 2009 - In Matthew Broome & Lisa Bortolotti (eds.), Psychiatry as Cognitive Neuroscience: Philosophical Perspectives. Oxford University Press.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  33. Making Sense of Scientists’ Responsibilities at the Interface of Science and Society: Commentary on “Six Domains of Research Ethics”.Vivian Weil - 2002 - Science and Engineering Ethics 8 (2):223-227.
    As Kenneth Pimple points out, scientists’ responsibilities to the larger society have received less attention than ethical issues internal to the practice of science. Yet scientists and specialists who study science have begun to provide analyses of the foundations and scope of scientsts’ responsibilities to society. An account of contributions from Kristen Shrader-Frechette, Melanie Leitner, Ullica Segerstråle, John Ahearne, Helen Longino, and Carl Cranor offers work on scientists’ social responsibilities upon which to build.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  34.  34
    Studying Human Behavior: How Scientists Investigate Aggression and Sexuality.Helen E. Longino - 2013 - University of Chicago Press.
    In Studying Human Behavior, Helen E. Longino enters into the complexities of human behavioral research, a domain still dominated by the age-old debate of “nature versus nurture.” Rather than supporting one side or another or attempting..
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   33 citations  
  35. Why Scientists Gather Evidence.Patrick Maher - 1990 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 41 (1):103-119.
    Direct download (10 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  36.  11
    How Scientists May 'Benefit From the Mess': A Resource Dependence Perspective on Individual Organizing in Contemporary Science.Olof Hallonsten - 2014 - Social Science Information 53 (3):341-362.
    There is general consensus in the study of science, and especially research policy studies, that a wave of profound change has struck academic science in the past decades. Central parts of this change are increased competition, growing demands of relevance and excellence, and managerialism reforms in institutions and policy systems. The underpinning thesis of this article is that, if seen from the perspective of individual scientists, these changes are exogenous and lead to greater environmental complexity and uncertainty, which in (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  37.  16
    Scientists and Amateurs: A History of the Royal Society.Harold L. Sheppard - 1952 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 3 (11):275-276.
  38.  43
    Following Scientists Through Society? Yes, but at Arm's Length.Yves Gingras - 1995 - In Jed Z. Buchwald (ed.), Scientific Practice: Theories and Stories of Doing Physics. University of Chicago Press. pp. 123--50.
  39.  21
    Nanotalk: Conversations with Scientists and Engineers About Ethics, Meaning, and Belief in the Development of Nanotechnology.Rosalyn W. Berne - 2006 - Lawrence Erlbaum.
    No one really knows where nanotechnology is leading, what its pursuit will mean, and how it may affect human and other forms of life. Nevertheless, its research and development are moving briskly into that unknown. It has been suggested that rapid movement towards 'who knows where' is endemic to all technological development; that its researchers pursue it for curiosity and enjoyment, without knowing the consequences, believing that their efforts will be beneficial. Further, that the enthusiasm for development comes with no (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  40.  5
    Three Scientists in Search of a Theorist.Robert T. Brown - 1978 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 1 (3):440-441.
  41.  21
    Social Scientists Under Threat: Resistance and Self-Censorship in Turkish Academia.Vezir Aktas, Marco Nilsson & Klas Borell - 2019 - British Journal of Educational Studies 67 (2):169-186.
  42.  31
    When Scientists Deceive: Applying the Federal Regulations.Collin C. O'Neil & Franklin G. Miller - 2009 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 37 (2):344-350.
    Deception is a useful methodological device for studying attitudes and behavior, but deceptive studies fail to fulfill the informed consent requirements in the U.S. federal regulations. This means that before they can be approved by Institutional Review Boards, they must satisfy the four regulatory conditions for a waiver or alteration of these requirements. To illustrate our interpretation, we apply the conditions to a recent study that used deception to show that subjects judged the same wine as more enjoyable when they (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  43.  6
    Scientists, Democracy and Society: A Community of Inquirers.Pierluigi Barrotta - 2018 - Springer Verlag.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  44.  18
    Scientists, Government and Organised Research in Great Britain 1914–16: The Early History of the DSIR. [REVIEW]Ian Varcoe - 1970 - Minerva 8 (1-4):192-216.
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  45.  6
    Scientists and Citizens: Getting to Quantum Technologies.David P. DiVincenzo - 2017 - Ethics and Information Technology 19 (4):247-251.
    I will discuss the history and prospects for new machines and instruments as anticipated in the newly announced EU Flagship for Quantum Technology. The program of Richard Feynman, as announced almost 60 years ago, to go to the “bottom” in the miniaturization of information-processing technology, has come to fruition, and a set of well-defined technologies, in the areas of quantum computing, quantum simulation, quantum sensing and metrology, and quantum communication, have emerged. I give a perspective on the sometimes abstruse significance (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  46.  19
    Scientists and the Cultural Politics of Academic Disciplines in Late 19th-Century Germany: Emil Du Bois-Reymond and the Controversy Over the Role of the Cultural Sciences.Irmline Veit-Brause - 2001 - History of the Human Sciences 14 (4):31-56.
    This article is concerned with interactions between the natural and the human sciences. It examines a specific late 19th-century episode in their relationship and argues that the schism between the two branches of knowledge was due to cognitive factors, but consolidated through the social dynamics of institutionalized disciplines. It contends that the assignment of a social function to the human sciences to compensate for the self-destructive tendencies inherent in the technological society was expressed even by those, at the end of (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  47. Dialogues with Scientists and Sages: The Search for Unity.Renée Weber (ed.) - 1986 - Routledge & Kegan Paul.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  48.  13
    Cowboys, Scientists, and Fossils.Jeremy Vetter - 2008 - Isis 99 (2):273-303.
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  49. Can Scientists Use Information Derived From Concentration Camps.Robert Pozos - forthcoming - Conference on the Meaning of the Holocaust for Bioethics, Minneapolis.
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  50.  17
    Scientists and Amateurs: A History of the Royal Society.Harold L. Sheppard - 1949 - Philosophy of Science 16 (4):351-351.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
1 — 50 / 1000