Is Peer Review a Good Way of Getting Knowledge of the World?

2min Snip

00:00

Play full episode

Summary

Transcript

Episode notes

The case that has been made indubitably over the course of this podcast is gaining true knowledge of the world whatever that means. Peer review should be in scientists in a different field yes yeah oh yeah exactly or people who just not experiment on top of that now. Once you admit that it opens up a whole bunch of things like who decides and how do we decide where the truth is once we found it i mean is this kind of consideration worth considering?

Everybody talks about the truth, but nobody does anything about it. And to be honest, how we talk about truth — what it is, and how to get there — can be a little sloppy at times. Philosophy to the rescue! I had a very ambitious conversation with Liam Kofi Bright, starting with what we mean by “truth” (correspondence, coherence, pragmatist, and deflationary approaches), and then getting into the nitty-gritty of how we actually discover it. There’s a lot to think about once we take a hard look at how science gets done, how discoveries are communicated, and what different kinds of participants can bring to the table.

Support Mindscape on Patreon.

Liam Kofi Bright received his Ph.D. in Logic, Computation and Methodology from Carnegie Mellon University. He is currently on the faculty of the London School of Economics in the Department of Philosophy, Logic, and the Scientific Method. He has worked on questions concerning peer review and fraud in scientific communities, intersectionality, logical empiricism, and Africana philosophy. He is well-known on Twitter as the Last Positivist.

See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.