SCIENCE AND OTHER COMMON NOUNS: FURTHER IMPLICATIONS OF ANTI‐ESSENTIALISM

The term “science” is a common noun that is used to designate a whole range of activities. If Reeves is right—and I think he is—that there is no essence to these activities that allows them to be objectively identified and demarcated from nonscience, then what qualifies as science is determined by c...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Zygon 2020-09, Vol.55 (3), p.782-791
Main Author: Stump, J. B.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
essentialism
evolution
history
language
pseudoscience
scientific method
truth
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites
container_end_page 791
container_issue 3
container_start_page 782
container_title Zygon
container_volume 55
creator Stump, J. B.
description The term “science” is a common noun that is used to designate a whole range of activities. If Reeves is right—and I think he is—that there is no essence to these activities that allows them to be objectively identified and demarcated from nonscience, then what qualifies as science is determined by communities. It becomes much more difficult on this antiessentialism position to identify and dismiss pseudo‐science. I suggest we might find a way forward, though, by engaging a philosophical tradition that has largely been neglected in English‐speaking science and religion studies, and by articulating a theory of consensus along the lines of Oreskes (2019).
doi_str_mv 10.1111/zygo.12622
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>wiley</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_wiley_primary_10_1111_zygo_12622_ZYGO12622</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>ZYGO12622</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-s1122-643bc5f178b057890f3aa05df257c41dd7600df573914df41a491efe3f817a963</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNotkE1OwzAQRi0EEqGw4QS5QIrHvwm7KLitRRKjJlnAxnKbGBUVgZoFCiuOwBk5CWlgNvP06ZtZPISuAc9hnJvP4fltDkQQcoICYEJGiWTsFAWYJxARGvNzdNH3LxhjIaUI0H2VaVVmKkzLu9DUK7UOM1MUpgxL05TVbbho1lOqi4dcZ2mtTVmFZjH2a_3z9a2qSo2U5roqLtGZd_u-u_rfM9QsVJ2totwsx9M86gEIiQSjmy33IOMN5jJOsKfOYd56wuWWQdtKgXHruaQJsNYzcCyBznfUxyBdIugMwd_fj92-G-z7YffqDoMFbI8O7NGBnRzYp8elmYj-Aq9WS_o</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Publisher</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>SCIENCE AND OTHER COMMON NOUNS: FURTHER IMPLICATIONS OF ANTI‐ESSENTIALISM</title><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Stump, J. B.</creator><creatorcontrib>Stump, J. B.</creatorcontrib><description>The term “science” is a common noun that is used to designate a whole range of activities. If Reeves is right—and I think he is—that there is no essence to these activities that allows them to be objectively identified and demarcated from nonscience, then what qualifies as science is determined by communities. It becomes much more difficult on this antiessentialism position to identify and dismiss pseudo‐science. I suggest we might find a way forward, though, by engaging a philosophical tradition that has largely been neglected in English‐speaking science and religion studies, and by articulating a theory of consensus along the lines of Oreskes (2019).</description><identifier>ISSN: 0591-2385</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1467-9744</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/zygo.12622</identifier><language>eng</language><subject>essentialism ; evolution ; history ; language ; pseudoscience ; scientific method ; truth</subject><ispartof>Zygon, 2020-09, Vol.55 (3), p.782-791</ispartof><rights>2020 by the Joint Publication Board of Zygon</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Stump, J. B.</creatorcontrib><title>SCIENCE AND OTHER COMMON NOUNS: FURTHER IMPLICATIONS OF ANTI‐ESSENTIALISM</title><title>Zygon</title><description>The term “science” is a common noun that is used to designate a whole range of activities. If Reeves is right—and I think he is—that there is no essence to these activities that allows them to be objectively identified and demarcated from nonscience, then what qualifies as science is determined by communities. It becomes much more difficult on this antiessentialism position to identify and dismiss pseudo‐science. I suggest we might find a way forward, though, by engaging a philosophical tradition that has largely been neglected in English‐speaking science and religion studies, and by articulating a theory of consensus along the lines of Oreskes (2019).</description><subject>essentialism</subject><subject>evolution</subject><subject>history</subject><subject>language</subject><subject>pseudoscience</subject><subject>scientific method</subject><subject>truth</subject><issn>0591-2385</issn><issn>1467-9744</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid/><recordid>eNotkE1OwzAQRi0EEqGw4QS5QIrHvwm7KLitRRKjJlnAxnKbGBUVgZoFCiuOwBk5CWlgNvP06ZtZPISuAc9hnJvP4fltDkQQcoICYEJGiWTsFAWYJxARGvNzdNH3LxhjIaUI0H2VaVVmKkzLu9DUK7UOM1MUpgxL05TVbbho1lOqi4dcZ2mtTVmFZjH2a_3z9a2qSo2U5roqLtGZd_u-u_rfM9QsVJ2totwsx9M86gEIiQSjmy33IOMN5jJOsKfOYd56wuWWQdtKgXHruaQJsNYzcCyBznfUxyBdIugMwd_fj92-G-z7YffqDoMFbI8O7NGBnRzYp8elmYj-Aq9WS_o</recordid><startdate>202009</startdate><enddate>202009</enddate><creator>Stump, J. B.</creator><scope/></search><sort><creationdate>202009</creationdate><title>SCIENCE AND OTHER COMMON NOUNS: FURTHER IMPLICATIONS OF ANTI‐ESSENTIALISM</title><author>Stump, J. B.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-s1122-643bc5f178b057890f3aa05df257c41dd7600df573914df41a491efe3f817a963</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>essentialism</topic><topic>evolution</topic><topic>history</topic><topic>language</topic><topic>pseudoscience</topic><topic>scientific method</topic><topic>truth</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Stump, J. B.</creatorcontrib><jtitle>Zygon</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Stump, J. B.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>SCIENCE AND OTHER COMMON NOUNS: FURTHER IMPLICATIONS OF ANTI‐ESSENTIALISM</atitle><jtitle>Zygon</jtitle><date>2020-09</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>55</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>782</spage><epage>791</epage><pages>782-791</pages><issn>0591-2385</issn><eissn>1467-9744</eissn><abstract>The term “science” is a common noun that is used to designate a whole range of activities. If Reeves is right—and I think he is—that there is no essence to these activities that allows them to be objectively identified and demarcated from nonscience, then what qualifies as science is determined by communities. It becomes much more difficult on this antiessentialism position to identify and dismiss pseudo‐science. I suggest we might find a way forward, though, by engaging a philosophical tradition that has largely been neglected in English‐speaking science and religion studies, and by articulating a theory of consensus along the lines of Oreskes (2019).</abstract><doi>10.1111/zygo.12622</doi><tpages>10</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0591-2385
ispartof Zygon, 2020-09, Vol.55 (3), p.782-791
issn 0591-2385
1467-9744
language eng
recordid cdi_wiley_primary_10_1111_zygo_12622_ZYGO12622
source Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects essentialism
evolution
history
language
pseudoscience
scientific method
truth
title SCIENCE AND OTHER COMMON NOUNS: FURTHER IMPLICATIONS OF ANTI‐ESSENTIALISM
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T19%3A31%3A39IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-wiley&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=SCIENCE%20AND%20OTHER%20COMMON%20NOUNS:%20FURTHER%20IMPLICATIONS%20OF%20ANTI%E2%80%90ESSENTIALISM&rft.jtitle=Zygon&rft.au=Stump,%20J.%20B.&rft.date=2020-09&rft.volume=55&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=782&rft.epage=791&rft.pages=782-791&rft.issn=0591-2385&rft.eissn=1467-9744&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/zygo.12622&rft_dat=%3Cwiley%3EZYGO12622%3C/wiley%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-s1122-643bc5f178b057890f3aa05df257c41dd7600df573914df41a491efe3f817a963%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true