What’s so bad about scientism?

In their attempt to defend philosophy from accusations of uselessness made by prominent scientists, such as Stephen Hawking, some philosophers respond with the charge of ‘scientism.’ This charge makes endorsing a scientistic stance, a mistake by definition. For this reason, it begs the question against these critics of philosophy, or anyone who is inclined to endorse a scientistic stance, and turns the scientism debate into a verbal dispute. In this paper, I propose a different definition of scientism, and thus a new way of looking at the scientism debate. Those philosophers who seek to defend philosophy against accusations of uselessness would do philosophy a much better service, I submit, if they were to engage with the definition of scientism put forth in this paper, rather than simply make it analytic that scientism is a mistake

Organized crime and preventive justice

By comparison with the prevention of terrorism, the prevention of acts of organizedcrime might be thought easier to conceptualize precisely and less controversial to legislate against and police. This impression is correct up to a point, because it is possible to arrive at some general characteristics of organized crime, and because legislation against it is not obviously bedevilled by the risk of violating civil or political rights, as in the case of terrorism. But there is a significant residue of legal, moral and political difficulty: legislation against organized crime is hard to make effective; the harm of organized crime is not uniform, and so some preventive legislation seems too sweeping and potentially unjust. More fundamentally, the scale and rewards of organized crime are often dependent on mass public participation in markets for proscribed goods, which may point to a hidden public consensus in favour of some of what is criminalized. Preventive policing and legislation in both areas, then, are less easily justified than first appears

Secondary analysis of teaching methods in introductory physics: A 50 k-student study

Citation: Von Korff, J., Archibeque, B., Gomez, K. A., Heckendorf, T., McKagan, S. B., Sayre, E. C., . . . Sorell, L. (2016). Secondary analysis of teaching methods in introductory physics: A 50 k-student study. American Journal of Physics, 84(12), 969-974. doi:10.1119/1.4964354Physics education researchers have developed many evidence-based instructional strategies to enhance conceptual learning of students in introductory physics courses. These strategies have historically been tested using assessments such as the Force Concept Inventory (FCI) and the Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation (FMCE). We have performed a review and analysis of FCI and FMCE data published between 1995 and 2014. We confirm previous findings that interactive engagement teaching techniques are significantly more likely to produce high student learning gains than traditional lecture-based instruction. We also establish that interactive engagement instruction works in many settings, including those with students having a high and low level of prior knowledge, at liberal arts and research universities, and enrolled in both small and large classes. (C) 2016 Author(s)

Healthcare workers' attitudes towards working during pandemic influenza: A multi method study

Background: Healthcare workers (HCWs) will be key players in any response to pandemic influenza, and will be in the front line of exposure to infection. Responding effectively to a pandemic relies on the majority of medical, nursing, laboratory and hotel services staff continuing to work normally. Planning assumes that during a pandemic normal healthcare service levels will be provided, although it anticipates that as caseloads increase only essential care will be provided. The ability of the NHS to provide expected service levels is entirely dependent upon HCWs continuing to work as normal. Methods/design: This study is designed as a two-phase multi-method study, incorporating focus groups and a questionnaire survey. In phase one, qualitative methods will be used to collect the views of a purposive sample of HCWs, to determine the range of factors associated with their responses to the prospect of working through pandemic influenza. In phase two, the findings from the focus groups, combined with the available literature, will be used to inform the design of a survey to determine the generalisability of these factors, enabling the estimation of the likely proportion of HCWs affected by each factor, and how likely it is that they would be willing and/or able to continue to work during an influenza pandemic. Discussion: There are potentially greater than normal health risks for some healthcare workers working during a pandemic, and these workers may be concerned about infecting family members/ friends. HCWs will be as liable as other workers to care for sick family members and friends. It is vital to have information about how motivated HCWs will be to continue to work during such a crisis, and what factors might influence their decision to work/not to work. Through the identification and subsequent management of these factors it may be possible to implement strategies that will alleviate the concerns and fears of HCWs and remove potential barriers to working