Beyond Kuhn: Methodological Contextualism and Partial Paradigms

Kuhn’s view of science is as follows. Science involves two key phases: normal and extraordinary. In normal science, disciplinary matrices (DMs) are large and pervasive. DMs involve “beliefs, values, techniques, and so on shared by the members of a given community” (Kuhn 1996, 175). “And so on” is regrettably vague, but Kuhn (1977, 1996) mentions three other key elements: symbolic generalizations (such as F=dp/dt), models (such as Bohr’s atomic model), and exemplars. These components of DMs overlap somewhat. For instance, symbolic generalizations may feature in techniques and beliefs, and models may exhibit values. To be a (genuine) scientist, in the normal science phase, is to puzzle solve within the boundaries of the DM. It is to buy into the ruling dogma (Kuhn 1963) and to accept that “failure to achieve a solution discredits only the scientist ... ‘It is a poor carpenter who blames his tools’” (Kuhn 1996, 80). Puzzle solving involves a wide variety of activities, includin

Exploring the use of online corporate sustainability information

Whilst the supply, exclusivity and prominence of online corporate sustainability information has increased in recent years, comparatively little is known about what information is used by whom. This paper explores which user groups access online corporate sustainability information, and assesses the relative use of sustainability reports and other forms of social and environmental information disseminated on corporate Websites. To collect the necessary empirical data, the paper analyses 4,652,471 successful requests for information made by the users of 10 UK FTSE 350 corporate websites. \ud \ud The paper finds that the majority of requests for online sustainability information originate from the reporting company indicative of an inward focus to sustainability reporting. In examining access to different online information sets, distinct profiles of corporate Website users begin to emerge. Requests from employees, private individuals, ISPs and consultants represent the vast majority of the online sustainability reporting audience and the corporate website in general. Contrastingly, a professional financially-orientated profile of users characterised by professional investors, creditors, accounting firms and lawyers make significantly more use of the Annual Report but significantly less use of sustainability reporting information and other online disclosures. Although prior literature notes how companies have yet to utilise the potential of the online medium in disseminating corporate sustainability information, disclosures are found to attract approximately a tenth of all corporate website requests. Environmental and ethical disclosures outside the Annual Report are the most popular sources of online corporate sustainability information whilst ‘standalone’ Sustainability and/or Ethics Reports attract comparatively few requests

The application of intangible asset accounting and discretionary policy choices in the UK football industry

This paper investigates the use of intangible asset accounting and the selection of accounting policies in the football industry, an environment where discretionary choices were available concerning accounting for transfer fees. Additionally, companies in this dynamic and socially influential industry are unique in recognising investments in human resources on the balance sheet. Proxies representing the level of tax costs, equity depletion, underwriter pressure and auditors used are found to have significant associations with policy selection. This contributes to the debate over the role of discretionary choices, particularly regarding the accounting treatment available for intangible assets, in financial reporting

Popper\u27s measure of corroboration and P(h|b)

This article shows that Popper\u27s measure of corroboration is inapplicable if, as Popper argued, the logical probability of synthetic universal statements is zero relative to any evidence that we might possess. It goes on to show that Popper\u27s definition of degree of testability, in terms of degree of logical content, suffers from a similar problem

Bertrand\u27s paradox revisited : why Bertrand\u27s \u27solutions\u27 are all inapplicable

This paper shows that Bertrand\u27s proposed ‘solutions’ to his own question, which generates his chord paradox, are inapplicable. It uses a simple analogy with cake cutting. The problem is that none of Bertrand\u27s solutions considers all possible cuts. This is no solace for the defenders of the principle of indifference, however, because it emerges that the paradox is harder to solve than previously anticipated

How might degrees of belief shift? On action conflicting with professed beliefs

People often act in ways that appear incompatible with their sincere assertions. But how might we explain such cases? On the shifting view, subjects’ degrees of belief may be highly sensitive to changes in context. This paper articulates and refines this view, after defending it against recent criticisms. It details two mechanisms by which degrees of beliefs may shift

Identification in games : changing places

This paper offers a novel ‘changing places’ account of identification in games, where the consequences of role swapping are crucial. First, it illustrates how such an account is consistent with the view, in classical game theory, that only outcomes (and not pathways) are significant. Second, it argues that this account is superior to the ‘pooled resources’ alternative when it comes to dealing with some situations in which many players identify. Third, it shows how such a ‘changing places’ account can be used in games where some of the players identify with one another, but others do not. Finally, it illustrates how the model can handle the notion that identification comes in degrees

Group level interpretations of probability : new directions

In this article, I present some new group level interpretations of probability, and champion one in particular: a consensus-based variant where group degrees of belief are construed as agreed upon betting quotients rather than shared personal degrees of belief. One notable feature of the account is that it allows us to treat consensus between experts on some matter as being on the union of their relevant background information. In the course of the discussion, I also introduce a novel distinction between intersubjective and interobjective interpretations of probability