Desacuerdo entre pares epistémicos en el debate naturaleza-cultura

Autores
Pallitto, Nahuel
Año de publicación
2018
Idioma
español castellano
Tipo de recurso
artículo
Estado
versión publicada
Descripción
Scientific disagreements constitute valuable resources for reflecting on epistemicpeer disagreements. In this essay I engage in the debate whether epistemic peers who dis-agree should be conciliatory or steadfast by examining how scientists actually react in theso called nature-nurture debate. The main conclusion of the analysis is that, when takinginto consideration concrete epistemic practices with peers responding to different epistemicperspectives, scientists have good reasons to be steadfast. At the same time, the theoreticalconceptualizations of the epistemology of peer disagreement illuminates certain aspects ofthe nature-nurture debate, such as its long persistence. Therefore, this article contributesboth to the debate over the epistemology of disagreement and to the understanding of anever-ending controversy in the life sciences.
Fil: Pallitto, Nahuel. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Filosofía y Letras. Instituto de Filosofía "Dr. Alejandro Korn"; Argentina
Materia
EPISTEMIC PEER DISAGREEMENTS
EPISTEMOLOGY
NATURE-NURTURE DEBATE
SCIENTIFIC CONTROVERSIES
Nivel de accesibilidad
acceso abierto
Condiciones de uso
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ar/
Repositorio
CONICET Digital (CONICET)
Institución
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
OAI Identificador
oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/177258
Acceder
id CONICETDig_b0192b8abdbfb216fc5997845437a6db
oai_identifier_str oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/177258
network_acronym_str CONICETDig
repository_id_str 3498
network_name_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
spelling Desacuerdo entre pares epistémicos en el debate naturaleza-culturaEpistemic peer disagreement in the nature-nurture debatePallitto, NahuelEPISTEMIC PEER DISAGREEMENTSEPISTEMOLOGYNATURE-NURTURE DEBATESCIENTIFIC CONTROVERSIEShttps://purl.org/becyt/ford/6.3https://purl.org/becyt/ford/6Scientific disagreements constitute valuable resources for reflecting on epistemicpeer disagreements. In this essay I engage in the debate whether epistemic peers who dis-agree should be conciliatory or steadfast by examining how scientists actually react in theso called nature-nurture debate. The main conclusion of the analysis is that, when takinginto consideration concrete epistemic practices with peers responding to different epistemicperspectives, scientists have good reasons to be steadfast. At the same time, the theoreticalconceptualizations of the epistemology of peer disagreement illuminates certain aspects ofthe nature-nurture debate, such as its long persistence. Therefore, this article contributesboth to the debate over the epistemology of disagreement and to the understanding of anever-ending controversy in the life sciences.Fil: Pallitto, Nahuel. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Filosofía y Letras. Instituto de Filosofía "Dr. Alejandro Korn"; ArgentinaUniversidade Federal de Santa Catarina2018-12info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfapplication/zipapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/11336/177258Pallitto, Nahuel; Desacuerdo entre pares epistémicos en el debate naturaleza-cultura; Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina; Principia; 22; 3; 12-2018; 485-5061414-42471808-1711CONICET DigitalCONICETspainfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/principia/article/view/1808-1711.2018v22n3p485info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.5007/1808-1711.2018v22n3p485info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ar/reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas2025-10-15T15:27:43Zoai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/177258instacron:CONICETInstitucionalhttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/oai/requestdasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:34982025-10-15 15:27:43.528CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicasfalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Desacuerdo entre pares epistémicos en el debate naturaleza-cultura
Epistemic peer disagreement in the nature-nurture debate
title Desacuerdo entre pares epistémicos en el debate naturaleza-cultura
spellingShingle Desacuerdo entre pares epistémicos en el debate naturaleza-cultura
Pallitto, Nahuel
EPISTEMIC PEER DISAGREEMENTS
EPISTEMOLOGY
NATURE-NURTURE DEBATE
SCIENTIFIC CONTROVERSIES
title_short Desacuerdo entre pares epistémicos en el debate naturaleza-cultura
title_full Desacuerdo entre pares epistémicos en el debate naturaleza-cultura
title_fullStr Desacuerdo entre pares epistémicos en el debate naturaleza-cultura
title_full_unstemmed Desacuerdo entre pares epistémicos en el debate naturaleza-cultura
title_sort Desacuerdo entre pares epistémicos en el debate naturaleza-cultura
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Pallitto, Nahuel
author Pallitto, Nahuel
author_facet Pallitto, Nahuel
author_role author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv EPISTEMIC PEER DISAGREEMENTS
EPISTEMOLOGY
NATURE-NURTURE DEBATE
SCIENTIFIC CONTROVERSIES
topic EPISTEMIC PEER DISAGREEMENTS
EPISTEMOLOGY
NATURE-NURTURE DEBATE
SCIENTIFIC CONTROVERSIES
purl_subject.fl_str_mv https://purl.org/becyt/ford/6.3
https://purl.org/becyt/ford/6
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv Scientific disagreements constitute valuable resources for reflecting on epistemicpeer disagreements. In this essay I engage in the debate whether epistemic peers who dis-agree should be conciliatory or steadfast by examining how scientists actually react in theso called nature-nurture debate. The main conclusion of the analysis is that, when takinginto consideration concrete epistemic practices with peers responding to different epistemicperspectives, scientists have good reasons to be steadfast. At the same time, the theoreticalconceptualizations of the epistemology of peer disagreement illuminates certain aspects ofthe nature-nurture debate, such as its long persistence. Therefore, this article contributesboth to the debate over the epistemology of disagreement and to the understanding of anever-ending controversy in the life sciences.
Fil: Pallitto, Nahuel. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Filosofía y Letras. Instituto de Filosofía "Dr. Alejandro Korn"; Argentina
description Scientific disagreements constitute valuable resources for reflecting on epistemicpeer disagreements. In this essay I engage in the debate whether epistemic peers who dis-agree should be conciliatory or steadfast by examining how scientists actually react in theso called nature-nurture debate. The main conclusion of the analysis is that, when takinginto consideration concrete epistemic practices with peers responding to different epistemicperspectives, scientists have good reasons to be steadfast. At the same time, the theoreticalconceptualizations of the epistemology of peer disagreement illuminates certain aspects ofthe nature-nurture debate, such as its long persistence. Therefore, this article contributesboth to the debate over the epistemology of disagreement and to the understanding of anever-ending controversy in the life sciences.
publishDate 2018
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2018-12
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/11336/177258
Pallitto, Nahuel; Desacuerdo entre pares epistémicos en el debate naturaleza-cultura; Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina; Principia; 22; 3; 12-2018; 485-506
1414-4247
1808-1711
CONICET Digital
CONICET
url http://hdl.handle.net/11336/177258
identifier_str_mv Pallitto, Nahuel; Desacuerdo entre pares epistémicos en el debate naturaleza-cultura; Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina; Principia; 22; 3; 12-2018; 485-506
1414-4247
1808-1711
CONICET Digital
CONICET
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv spa
language spa
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/principia/article/view/1808-1711.2018v22n3p485
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.5007/1808-1711.2018v22n3p485
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ar/
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ar/
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
application/zip
application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
reponame_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
collection CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname_str Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.name.fl_str_mv CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.mail.fl_str_mv dasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.ar
_version_ 1846083418611253248
score 13.22299

Publicaciones similares