Location

Room 2

Document Type

Commentary

Keywords

bias, chemistry, Copernican Revolution, cognitive science, emotions, evidence, neuroscience, warrants

Start Date

5-6-2020 3:01 PM

End Date

5-6-2020 4:00 PM

Abstract

This commentary consists of three parts. The first attempts to summarize the main theme of Weinstein’s paper, insofar as I can understand it; the latter qualification is obvious and almost redundant, except that I must confess I found it very challenging to make sense of his essay. The second part of my commentary advances some negative criticism of his paper, by focusing on issues of conceptual clarity and argumentative cogency. The third part elaborates a positive appreciation of what seems to be Weinstein’s main claim; I do so mostly on the basis of things which he does not even mention, but with which I happen to be acquainted.

Included in

Philosophy Commons

Share

COinS
 
Jun 5th, 3:01 PM Jun 5th, 4:00 PM

Commentary on: Mark Weinstein’s “Warranting Evidence in Diverse Evidentiary Settings”

Room 2

This commentary consists of three parts. The first attempts to summarize the main theme of Weinstein’s paper, insofar as I can understand it; the latter qualification is obvious and almost redundant, except that I must confess I found it very challenging to make sense of his essay. The second part of my commentary advances some negative criticism of his paper, by focusing on issues of conceptual clarity and argumentative cogency. The third part elaborates a positive appreciation of what seems to be Weinstein’s main claim; I do so mostly on the basis of things which he does not even mention, but with which I happen to be acquainted.