scholarly journals Analysis

2020 ◽  
pp. 77-86
Author(s):  
Francis Müller
Keyword(s):  
Grounded Theory ◽  
Material Culture ◽  
Common Sense ◽  
Creative Practice ◽  
Practice Analysis ◽  
Common Sense Knowledge ◽  
Observation Protocols

AbstractDrawing on sociological Grounded Theory and ethnographic semantics, this chapter argues that analysis is a genuinely creative practice. Analysis entails not simply classifying the data found or produced in the field in accordance with everyday, common-sense knowledge but rather looking for aesthetic and semantic clues in it. It is also not a fixed program, but rather a hermeneutic and explorative search for new connections and patterns of meaning. This is demonstrated through examples of various data materials, such as transcripts of interviews, observation protocols, photographs, video, and material culture.

scholarly journals You Don’t Fool Me: On Scams, Scambaiting, Deception, and Epistemological Ambiguity at R/scambait on Reddit

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 205630512110356
Author(s):  
Marta Dynel ◽  
Andrew S. Ross
Keyword(s):  
Grounded Theory ◽  
Significant Finding ◽  
Potential Shift ◽  
Creative Practice ◽  
General Plane ◽  
Communicative Activities ◽  
A Site

With a focus on the online phenomena of scamming and scambaiting, this article explores users’ communicative activities on Reddit’s r/scambait subreddit. Drawing on a representative corpus viewed through grounded theory, we establish the basic categories of posts and then unpack those further to reveal the deceptive practices being undertaken by both scammers and scambaiters, as well as Redditors’ untruthfulness in their fabricated posts. The analysis reveals that the r/scambait subreddit exists as a site of humorous entertainment arising from various forms of deception. Scammers’ deceptive strategies are depicted as amusingly naïve and inefficient, while scambaiters’ deceptive messages targeted at scammers demonstrate great creativity and wittiness. In both cases, scammer-victims are disparaged for being immensely gullible or downright stupid; and Redditors earn online plaudits for submitting the most upvoted posts. Our significant finding is that posts such as those at r/scambait should never be taken at face value due to their inherent epistemological ambiguity, to which the users choose to remain oblivious or indifferent. Furthermore, on a general plane, this study indicates a potential shift in the emic understanding of the concept of “scambaiting” from a punitive measure and an educational instrument to a creative practice geared toward posters’ kudos and users’ joint humorous experience through “baitertainment” and “scamusement.”

scholarly journals The liberation of nature and knowledge: a case study on Hans Reichenbach’s naturalism

Synthese ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
László Kocsis ◽  
Adam Tamas Tuboly
Keyword(s):  
Common Sense ◽  
Interesting Case ◽  
Valuable Contribution ◽  
Rhetorical Strategy ◽  
Scientific Philosophy ◽  
Political Program ◽  
History Of ◽  
Contemporary Context ◽  
Common Sense Knowledge

AbstractOur main goal in this paper is to present and scrutinize Reichenbach’s own naturalism in our contemporary context, with special attention to competing versions of the concept. By exploring the idea of Reichenbach’s naturalism, we will argue that he defended a liberating, therapeutic form of naturalism, meaning that he took scientific philosophy (or philosophy of nature, Naturphilosophie) to be a possible cure for bad old habits and traditional ways of philosophy. For Reichenbach, naturalistic scientific philosophy was a well-established form of liberation. We do not intend to suggest that Reichenbach acted as an inventor of naturalism; nonetheless, invoking the term and the idea of ‘naturalism’ is more than a simple rhetorical strategy for rehabilitating Reichenbach as a forerunner of this field. We think that his ideas can make a valuable contribution to contemporary debates, and that he presents an interesting case among the other scientifically oriented proponents of his time. After presenting a short reconstruction of the meaning of naturalism—or, more appropriately, naturalisms—in order to be able to correctly situate Reichenbach within his own as well as a systematic context, we discuss Reichenbach’s naturalism against the background of his scientific philosophy, his views on the relation of common-sense knowledge to science, and his efforts at popularization. To delve deeper into this topic, we present a case study to show how Reichenbach argued that in both scientific and philosophical discussions (assuming their naturalistic continuity), it is necessary to move from the request and value of truth to probability. And, finally, we argue that the liberation of knowledge and nature was a socio-political program for Reichenbach, who talked about his own scientific philosophy as “a crusade.” By emphasizing this aspect of Reichenbach’s naturalism, we may be in a better position to situate him in the history of analytic philosophy in general, and in the yet-to-be-written narrative of the naturalistic movement in particular.

Noumenal Causality Reconsidered: Affection, Agency, and Meaning in Kant

1997 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 209-245 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth R. Westphal
Keyword(s):  
Common Sense ◽  
Natural Science ◽  
Necessary Conditions ◽  
Positive Answer ◽  
Pure Reason ◽  
Logical Possibility ◽  
Objective Reality ◽  
Metaphysical Question ◽  
Spatio Temporal ◽  
Common Sense Knowledge

The lead question of Kant's first Critique, indeed his whole Critical Philosophy is ‘How is Metaphysics as a Science Possible?’ Neo-Kantian and recent Anglophone interpretations of Kant's epistemology have concentrated on the ‘Transcendental Analytic’ of the first Critique, and have taken Kant's positive and legitimate sense of metaphysics to concern the necessary conditions of our knowledge of mathematics, natural science, and of course, our common sense knowledge of a spatio-temporal world of objects and events. However, in the ‘Canon of Pure Reason’ in the first Critique Kant indicates quite clearly that, although two of the leading sub-questions of metaphysics — ‘What should I so?’ and ‘What may I hope?’ — cannot be answered on theoretical grounds, they may be answered on practical grounds (A804-05=B832-33). Those practical grounds are elaborated and supplemented (mainly) in the latter two Critiques and the Religion. In each case, however, a definite and positive answer to a metaphysical question involves giving ‘objective reality’ to a concept, e.g., the concepts of freedom or immortality. ‘Objective reality’ involves possible reference to an object, where ‘possible reference’ involves more than merely describing a logical possibility.

Erratum: Common Sense Knowledge Based Personality Recognition from Text

2013 ◽  
pp. E1-E1
Author(s):  
Soujanya Poria ◽  
Alexander Gelbukh ◽  
Basant Agarwal ◽  
Erik Cambria ◽  
Newton Howard
Keyword(s):  
Common Sense ◽  
Knowledge Based ◽  
Personality Recognition ◽  
Common Sense Knowledge

Augmenting Mobile Localization with Activities and Common Sense Knowledge

2011 ◽  
pp. 72-81
Author(s):  
Nicola Bicocchi ◽  
Gabriella Castelli ◽  
Marco Mamei ◽  
Franco Zambonelli
Keyword(s):  
Common Sense ◽  
Mobile Localization ◽  
Common Sense Knowledge
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document