Browsing by Author "Smith, BH"
Now showing 1 - 13 of 13
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Open Access Anthropotheology: Latour speaking religiously(New Literary History, 2016-03-01) Smith, BHItem Open Access Chinese comparisons and questionable acts(Common Knowledge, 2011-12-01) Smith, BHItem Open Access Clearing up after the science wars: A response to emily A. Schultz(Reviews in Anthropology, 2011-04-01) Smith, BHEmily Schultz seeks in "Fear of Scandalous Knowledge" (Schultz 2010) to bring important approaches in science studies, along with recent developments in related fields, to the attention of fellow anthropologists. She also seeks to counter lingering misunderstandings and misrepresentations of the views involved. Her conscientious efforts to both these ends should, I think, be applauded and I am glad that she found my book Scandalous Knowledge (Smith 2006) useful along the way. There are, however, a number of places where Schultz's phrasing or emphasis may itself be misleading. I note some of these below and offer a few additional comments. © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.Item Open Access Cutting-Edge Equivocation: Conceptual Moves and Rhetorical Strategies in Contemporary Anti-Epistemology(South Atlantic Quarterly, 2002-01-01) Smith, BHItem Open Access "Dolls, Demons and DNA"(London Review of Books, 2012-03) Smith, BHItem Open Access "It’s Like Getting Married"(London Review of Books, 2009-02) Smith, BHItem Open Access Reading at large: Reflections on the forum "What can reading do?"(Novel, 2012-03-01) Smith, BHItem Open Access Reply to an Analytic Philosopher(South Atlantic Quarterly, 2002-01-01) Smith, BHItem Open Access Science and religion, natural and unnatural(2012-12-01) Smith, BHItem Open Access SCIENTIZING THE HUMANITIES Shifts, Collisions, Negotiations(COMMON KNOWLEDGE, 2016-09) Smith, BHItem Open Access The chimera of relativism: A tragicomedy(Common Knowledge, 2011-12-01) Smith, BHItem Open Access Unloading the Self-Refutation Charge(Common Knowledge, 2019-04-01) Smith, BHThis essay is a critical examination of the charge of self-refutation, particularly as leveled by orthodoxy-defending philosophers against those maintaining epistemologically unorthodox, especially relativistic or skeptical, views. Beginning with an analysis of its classic illustration in Plato’s Theaetetus as leveled by Socrates against Protagoras’s “Man is the measure . . ,” the essay considers various aspects of the charge, including its paradigmatic theatrical staging, its frequent pedagogic restaging, its logical and rhetorical structure, its complex emotional and psychological effects, and its apparent cognitive dynamics. After discussion of the comparable structure and dynamics of related self-undoings in myth and drama, the examination of alleged exposures of self-contradiction moves to general observations regarding the recurrent encounter between conviction and skepticism (or orthodox and unorthodox views) and the question of how best to understand the phenomenon of fundamentally clashing and arguably incommensurable beliefs. These encounters and questions are usefully addressed and illuminated, Smith suggests, by constructivist epistemology, contemporary history and sociology of science, and recent work in cognitive theory. In connection with the logically circular question-begging or self-affirmation commonly involved in (alleged) demonstrations of the relativist’s (supposed) self-refutation, Smith gives particular attention to the evidently endemic tendency to cognitive self-stabilization.Item Open Access What Was “Close Reading”?(the minnesota review, 2016) Smith, BH