OK, I'm one of 75 viewers; and probably one of maybe even less people that have read her book "Evidence and Inquiry: A Pragmatist Reconstruction of Epistemology." I'm sure more have done so, but probably only because they were required to do so for a course. I blew a lifetime opportunity to have personally interviewed her, but such is life. This is an excellent presentation most appropriate to anyone sincerely interested in the integrity of American forensic sciences.
Susan Haack is one of my favorites. She's funny and serious all at once, and drives home her carefully researched perspective with good story telling. Here, she illuminates pressing challenges to the integrity of science as a collective human project, and the fundamental values which we mustn't let be eroded. If you don't have time for the whole talk, I recommend at least listen to her story starting at 48:50, and her comments about public distrust of science at 57:52. You may find that you care more about the topic than you realize.
Susan Haack should be, or perhaps could be at any of the best philosophy departments in the United States or England. However, it is humorous and a bit unfortunate to hear her apologize for the wonderful world from ancient Greek, "epistemology."
OK, I'm one of 75 viewers; and probably one of maybe even less people that have read her book "Evidence and Inquiry: A Pragmatist Reconstruction of Epistemology." I'm sure more have done so, but probably only because they were required to do so for a course. I blew a lifetime opportunity to have personally interviewed her, but such is life. This is an excellent presentation most appropriate to anyone sincerely interested in the integrity of American forensic sciences.
Susan Haack is one of my favorites. She's funny and serious all at once, and drives home her carefully researched perspective with good story telling. Here, she illuminates pressing challenges to the integrity of science as a collective human project, and the fundamental values which we mustn't let be eroded.
If you don't have time for the whole talk, I recommend at least listen to her story starting at 48:50, and her comments about public distrust of science at 57:52. You may find that you care more about the topic than you realize.
Ray Silva I would agree, absolutely fabulous lecture. I would say her panel appearance for TAM '13 gave her a boost in popularity.
In elementary school we were briefly introduced to doing long division in Roman numerals. Nearly impossible.
Dr. Hack comes on stage at about 5:35, begins lecturing at about 5:40.
43:38 Controlling Methods Sections
48:00 Co-Author & Ghost Author
Susan Haack should be, or perhaps could be at any of the best philosophy departments in the United States or England. However, it is humorous and a bit unfortunate to hear her apologize for the wonderful world from ancient Greek, "epistemology."
31:00 Peer Review & Professorship
38:00 Academic Journals Are Serious Money Making Machines - Not How It Was Originally Intended
22:00 There is No Scientific Method