Articles are stand-alone contributions to SERRC.| Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective
Critical Replies are engagements with articles recently published in Social Epistemology.| Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective
In 2023, M R. X. Dentith edited a special issue—”Conspiracy Theory Theory”—of Social Epistemology (37:4). SERRC readers are familiar with Dentith’s philosophical work on conspiracy theory theory—work…| Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective
In 2023, M R. X. Dentith edited a special issue—”Conspiracy Theory Theory”—of Social Epistemology (37:4). SERRC readers are familiar with Dentith’s philosophical work on conspiracy theory theory—work…| Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective
In his review, Uwe Peters (2024) challenges my claim that we currently have no satisfactory social epistemology of AI-based science. He argues that the situation is not as dire as I take it to be…| Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective
For many philosophers, it doesn’t seem right to say that we are mainly in the business of trying to describe our concepts. We are, at our best, trying to improve them. ‘Conceptual engineering’ describes this vision of philosophical practice. It is not hard to see its appeal. This metaphilosophical orientation gives us a clear mission that caters to what many take to be our distinct skill set: a combination of conceptual analysis and normative argument. … [please read below the rest of...| Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective