Snow’s Argument Cultures: From clashing contexts to heterogeneous solidarity

Understood as an analysis of clashing argument cultures, C. P. Snow’s “Two Cultures” illuminates challenges to interdisciplinarity. Argument cultures involve not only distinct styles of argumentation and background assumptions, but also emotional attitudes and prejudices, including disdain for other argument cultures, that rest on ideals of inquiry and society. Case studies suggest that fruitful interdisciplinary work across such cultures requires institutionalized boundary contexts in which heterogeneous solidarity can develop

Argumentation Theory and the Recent Philosophy of Science

The thesis of my paper is that argumentation theory provides a promising heuristic framework for addressing issues raised by the rationality debates in the philosophy of science, in particular the issues connected with scientific controversies over the appraisal and choice of competing theories. The first part of the paper grounds this thesis historically. In criticizing the logical empiricists, Thomas Kuhn set the stage for the subsequent opposition between a normative, anti-sociological philosophy of science and a descriptive, anti-philosophical sociology of knowledge. But he also hinted at the main lines of a multi-dimensional theory of argumentation which might frame a wide range of current investigations into scientific reasoning. In the second part of the paper I focus on the central normative aspect of this framework, dialectical argumentation, and clarify the key challenge, the underdetermination of theories by evidence. In the third part, I attempt to get beyond the dichotomy informing the rationality debates by reformulating the problem of theory choice within a broader context of scientific rationality

Effects of a combination economic empowerment and family strengthening intervention on psychosocial well-being among Ugandan adolescent girls and young women: Analysis of a cluster randomized controlled trial (Suubi4Her)

PURPOSE: Economic empowerment and family strengthening interventions have shown promise for improving psychosocial well-being in a range of populations. This study investigates the effect of a combination economic and family strengthening intervention on psychosocial well-being among Ugandan adolescent girls and young women (AGYW). METHODS: We harnessed data from a three-arm cluster randomized controlled trial among AGYW aged 14-17 years in 47 Ugandan secondary schools. Schools were randomized to either a youth development account intervention (YDA) [N = 16 schools], YDA plus a multiple family group intervention (YDA + MFG) [N = 15 schools], or bolstered standard of care (BSOC) [N = 16 schools]. We estimated the effect of each intervention (BSOC = referent) on three measures of psychosocial well-being: hopelessness (Beck\u27s Hopelessness Scale), self-concept (Tennessee Self-Concept Scale), and self-esteem (Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale) at 12 months following enrollment using multi-level linear mixed models for each outcome. RESULTS: A total of 1,260 AGYW (mean age, 15.4) were enrolled-471 assigned to YDA (37%), 381 to YDA + MFG (30%), and 408 to usual care (32%). Over the 12-month follow-up, participants assigned to the YDA + MFG group had significantly greater reductions in hopelessness and improvements in self-esteem outcomes compared to BSOC participants. Those enrolled in the YDA arm alone also had significantly greater reductions in hopelessness compared to BSOC participants. DISCUSSION: Combination interventions, combining economic empowerment (represented here by YDA), and family-strengthening (represented by MFG) can improve the psychosocial well-being of AGYW. The long-term effects of these interventions should be further tested for potential scale-up in an effort to address the persistent mental health treatment gap in resource-constrained settings

Th-MYCN Mice with Caspase-8 Deficiency Develop Advanced Neuroblastoma with Bone Marrow Metastasis

Neuroblastoma, the most common extracranial pediatric solid tumor, is responsible for 15% of all childhood cancer deaths. Patients frequently present at diagnosis with metastatic disease, particularly to the bone marrow (BM). Advances in therapy and understanding of the metastatic process have been limited due in part, to the lack of animal models harboring BM disease. The widely employed transgenic model, the Th-MYCN mouse, exhibits limited metastasis to this site. Here we establish the first genetic immunocompetent mouse model for metastatic neuroblastoma with enhanced secondary tumors in the BM. This model recapitulates two frequent alterations in metastatic neuroblasoma, over-expression of MYCN and loss of caspase-8 expression. Mouse caspase-8 gene was deleted in neural crest lineage cells by crossing a Th-Cre transgenic mouse with a caspase-8 conditional knockout mouse. This mouse was then crossed with the neuroblastoma prone Th-MYCN mouse. While over-expression of MYCN by itself rarely caused bone marrow metastasis, combining MYCN overexpression and caspase-8 deletion significantly enhanced BM metastasis (37% incidence). Microarray expression studies of the primary tumors mRNAs and microRNAs revealed extracellular matrix (ECM) structural changes, increased expression of genes involved in epithelial to mesenchymal transition, inflammation and down-regulation of miR-7a and miR-29b. These molecular changes have been shown to be associated with tumor progression and activation of the cytokine transforming growth factor beta (TGF-β) pathway in various tumor models. Cytokine TGF-β can preferentially promote single cell motility and blood borne metastasis and therefore activation of this pathway may explain the enhanced BM metastasis observed in this animal model.Fil: Teitz, Tal. St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital. Department of Tumor Cell Biology; Estados UnidosFil: Inoue, Madoka. St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital. Department of Tumor Cell Biology; Estados UnidosFil: Valentine, Marcus B.. St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital. Department of Tumor Cell Biology; Estados UnidosFil: Zhu, Kejin. St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital. Department of Tumor Cell Biology; Estados UnidosFil: Rehg, Jerold E.. St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital. Department of Pathology; Estados UnidosFil: Zhao, Wei. St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital. Department of Biostatistics; Estados UnidosFil: Finkelstein, David. St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital. Department of Computational Biology; Estados UnidosFil: Wang, Yong-Dong. St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital. Hartwell Center for Bioinformatics and Biotechnology; Estados UnidosFil: Johnson, Melissa D.. St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital. Animal Imaging Center; Estados UnidosFil: Calabrese, Christopher. St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital. Animal Imaging Center; Estados UnidosFil: Rubinstein, Marcelo. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Investigaciones en Ingeniería Genética y Biología Molecular; ArgentinaFil: Hakem, Razqallah. University of Toronto. Ontario Cancer Institute. Department of Medical Biophysics; CanadáFil: Weiss, William A.. University of California. Departments of Neurology, Pediatrics and Neurological Surgery; Estados UnidosFil: Lahti, Jill M.. St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital. Department of Tumor Cell Biology; Estados Unido

Crossing Boundaries: Contexts of Practice as Common Goods

In the literature on scientific practices, one finds sustained analyses of the contextualist elements of inquiry. However, the ways in which local and disciplinary contexts of practice function as common goods remain largely unexplored. In this paper I argue that a contextualist analysis of scientific practices as common goods can shed light on the challenges of scientific communication and interdisciplinary collaboration, albeit without invoking Kuhn's problematic notion of incommensurability

Assessing the Cogency of Arguments: lbree Kinds of Merits

This article proposes a way of connecting two levels at which scholars have studied discursive practices from a normative perspective: on the one hand, local transactions-face-to-face arguments or dialogues-and broadly dispersed public debates on the other. To help focus my analysis, I select two representatives of work at these two levels: the pragmadialectical model of critical discussion and Habermas's discourse theory of politicallegal deliberation. The two models confront complementary challenges that arise from gaps between their prescriptions and contexts of actual discourse. In response, I propose a theory of argument cogency that distinguishes three kinds of merit: content, transactional, and public. Normative links between the two levels arise through the ways argument contents spread across multiple transactions in a social space whose structure and composition favor collective reasonableness