Argumentation

, Volume 11, Issue 1, pp 51–74 | Cite as

The Public Dimension Of Scientific Controversies

  • Jeanine Czubaroff
Article
  • 109 Downloads

Abstract

Acceptance of three tenets of the doctrine of scientific objectivity, namely, the tenets of consensus, compartmentalization, and ahistorical truth, undermines scientists‘ appreciation of the importance of scientific controversy and consideration of the policy and value implications of controversial scientific theories. This essay rejects these tenets and suggests scientists appreciate theoretical diversity, learn rational means for adjudicating value differences, and cultivate conversational as well as written forms of communication.

B. F. Skinner oral communication rhetoric of science scientific controversy 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Adler, M. J.: 1958–1961, The Idea of Freedom, Doubleday, Garden City, New York.Google Scholar
  2. Barlow, G. W.: 1984, ‘Skinner on Selection — A Case Study of Intellectual Isolation’, in A. C. Catania and S. Harnad (eds.), Canonical Papers of B. F. Skinner, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 7, 481–482.Google Scholar
  3. Bazerman, C.: 1981, ‘What Written Knowledge Does: Three Examples of Academic Discourse’, Phil. Soc. Sci. 11, 361–387.Google Scholar
  4. Bernstein, R. J.: 1983, Beyond Objectivism and Relativism: Science, Hermeneutics, and Praxis, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar
  5. ‘Beyond Freedom What’: 1972, Transcript of audiotape recorded at Symposium on Operant Conditioning, Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions, Santa Barbara, CA.Google Scholar
  6. Boring, E. G.: 1929, ‘The Psychology of Controversy’, Psychological Review 36, 97–121. (Reprinted 1963 in R. I. Watson and D. T. Campbell (eds.), History, Psychology, and Science: Selected Papers of Edwin G. Boring, Wiley, New York; 67–84.)Google Scholar
  7. Catania, A. C. and S. Harnad (eds.): 1984, ‘Canonical Papers of B. F. Skinner’, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 7, 470–724.Google Scholar
  8. Catania, A. C.: 1991, The Gifts of Culture and Eloquence: An Open Letter to Michael J. Mahoney in Reply to His Article, ‘Scientific Psychology and Radical Behaviorism’, The Behavior Analyst 14, 16–72.Google Scholar
  9. Cooper, M.: 1989, Analyzing Public Discourse, Waveland Press, Prospect Heights, ILL.Google Scholar
  10. Corbett, P.: 1965, Ideologies, Harcourt, Brace, and World, Inc., New York.Google Scholar
  11. Czubaroff, J.: 1988, ‘Criticism and Response in the Skinner Controversies’, Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 49(2), 321–329.Google Scholar
  12. Czubaroff, J.: March 1993, ‘Value Issues in Social Scientific Discourse’, A paper presented at the Eastern States Communication Association Convention, New Haven, Connecticut.Google Scholar
  13. Dahlbom, B.: 1984, ‘Skinner, Selection, and Control’, in A. C. Catania and S. Harnad (eds.), Canonical Papers of B. F. Skinner, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 7, 484–486.Google Scholar
  14. Fisher, W.: 1978, ‘Toward a Logic of Good Reasons’, The Quarterly Journal of Speech 64, 376–384.Google Scholar
  15. Griswold, C.: 1980, ‘Style and Philosophy: The Case of Plato's Dialogue’, Monist 63, 530–546.Google Scholar
  16. Habermas, J.: 1971, Knowledge and Human Interest, Beacon Press, Boston.Google Scholar
  17. Hackforth, R.: 1972 reprint (Tr.) Plato's Phaedrus, Cambridge University Press, London.Google Scholar
  18. Hagstrom, W. O.: 1965, The Scientific Community, Basic Books, New York.Google Scholar
  19. Hesse, M.: 1980, Revolutions and Reconstructions in the Philosophy of Science, Indiana University Press, Bloomington.Google Scholar
  20. Klumpp, J. F.: 1990, ‘Taking Social Argument Seriously’, in R. Trapp and J. Schuetz (eds.), Perspectives on Argumentation: Essays in Honor of Wayne Brockriede, Waveland Press, Prospect Heights, ILL.Google Scholar
  21. Kuhn, T.: 1962, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  22. Latour, B. and S. Woolgar, 1979, Laboratory Life: The Social Construction of Scientific Facts, Sage, London.Google Scholar
  23. Laudan, L.: 1977, Progress and Its Problems: Towards a Theory of Scientific Growth, University of California Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  24. Laudan, L.: 1984, Science and Values: The Aims of Science and their Role in Scientific Debate, University of California Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  25. Lee, V.: 1988, Beyond Behaviorism, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.Google Scholar
  26. Mahoney, M. J.: 1989, ‘Scientific Psychology and Radical Behaviorism: Important Distinctions Based in Scientism and Objectivism’, American Psychologist 44(11), 1372–1377.Google Scholar
  27. Mahoney, M. J.: 1990, ‘Diatribe Is Not Dialogue: On Selected Attempts to Attack and Defend Behaviorism’, American Psychologist 45(10), 1183–1184.Google Scholar
  28. McKerrow, R. E.: 1990, ‘Argument Communities’, in R. Trapp and J. Schuetz (eds.), Perspectives on Argumentation: Essays in Honor of Wayne Brockriede, Waveland Press, Prospect Heights, ILL.Google Scholar
  29. Modgil, S. and C. Modgil (eds.): 1987, B. F. Skinner: Consensus and Controversy, Falmer Press, New York.Google Scholar
  30. Najder, Z.: 1975, Values and Evaluations, Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  31. Ong, W. J.: 1971, Rhetoric, Romance and Technology: Studies in the Interaction of Expression and Culture, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
  32. Perelman, C. and L. Olbrechts-tyteca: 1969, The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation (J. Wilkenson and P. Weaver, trans.), University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame, IN.Google Scholar
  33. Platt, J.: 1973, ‘The Skinnerian Revolution’, in H. Wheeler (ed.), Beyond the Punitive Society: Operant Conditioning: Social and Political Aspects, W.H. Freeman and Co, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  34. Proctor, R. W. and D. J. Weeks: 1990, ‘There is no Room for Scientism in Scientific Psychology: A Comment on Mahoney’, American Psychologist 45(10), 1177–1178.Google Scholar
  35. Rogers, Carl and B. T. Skinner: 1956, ‘Some Issues Concerning the Control of Human Behavior’, Science Magazine 124, 1057–1066.Google Scholar
  36. Rumbaugh, D.: 1984, ‘Perspectives by Consequences’, in A. C. Catania and S. Harnad (eds.), Canonical papers of B. F. Skinner, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 7, 496–497.Google Scholar
  37. Skinner, B. F.: 1971, Beyond Freedom and Dignity, Alfred A. Knopf, New York.Google Scholar
  38. Skinner, B. F.: 1972a, ‘I have been misunderstood....’ An interview with B. F. Skinner, The Center Magazine 5(2), 63–65.Google Scholar
  39. Skinner, B. F.: 1973, ‘Answers for my Crities’, in H. Wheeler (ed.), Beyond the Punitive Society: Operant Conditioning: Social and Political Aspects, W.H. Freeman and Co, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  40. Skinner, B. F.: 1981, ‘Selection by Consequences’, Science 213, 501–504.Google Scholar
  41. Skinner, B. F.: 1984, ‘The Evolution of Behavior’, Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 41, 2, 217–221.Google Scholar
  42. Smith, J. Maynard: 1984, ‘A One-Sided View of Evolution’, in A. C. Catania and S. Harnad (eds.), Canonical papers of B. F. Skinner, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 7, 493–494.Google Scholar
  43. Toulmin, S.: 1982, The Return to Cosmology: Post Modern Science and the Theology of Nature, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
  44. Toulmin, S.: 1972, Human Understanding, Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  45. Wallace, K. R.: 1963, ‘The Substance of Rhetoric: Good Reasons’, Quarterly Journal of Speech 49, 239–249.Google Scholar
  46. Wheeler, H. (ed.): 1973, Beyond the Punitive Society: Operant Conditioning: Social and Political Aspects, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  47. Young, M. J.: 1980, ‘The Use of Evidence in Value Argument: A Suggestion’, in J. Rhodes and S. Newell (eds.), The Proceedings of the Summer Conference on Argumentation, SCA, Imprint Falls Church, VA, 287–295.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jeanine Czubaroff

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations