Bringing Historical Scientific Arguments Back to Life: The Case of Continental Drift

Science Scope ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 038 (07) ◽  
Author(s):  
Allyson Rogan-Klyve ◽  
Micki Halsey Randall ◽  
Tyler St. Clair ◽  
Ron Gray
Author(s):  
Benjamin Grob-Fitzgibbon
Keyword(s):  

ADALAH ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Indra Rahmatullah

Abstract:A draft law must be able to answer and solve the main problem of the society so that with the existence of the law the community gets legal protection from the state. However, the draft of Cipta Kerja Law makes an endless controversy. In fact, the draft was allegedly containing some problems since its appearance. Therefore, academic research (Assesment Report) is needed so that the rules in the draft have basic scientific arguments that can be justified. Unfortunately, the draft does not conduct an assesment report to know whether the society need the law and urgent.Keywords: Legal Protection, Controversy and Assesment Report Abstrak:Sebuah rancangan undang-undang harus dapat menjawab dan menyentuh pokok permasalahan masyarakat sehingga dengan adanya undang-undang tersebut masyarakat mendapatkan sebuah perlindungan hukum dari negara. Namun, dalam RUU Cipta Kerja ini justru berakibat pada kontroversi yang tiada hentinya. Bahkan, disinyalir RUU ini mengandung kecacatan sejak awal pembentukannya. Oleh karena itu, dibutuhkan penelitian akademis sehingga aturan-aturan yang ada dalam RUU ini mempunyai basis argumentasi ilmiah yang dapat dipertanggungjawabkan yang salah satunya adalah dengan membuat Laporan Kelayakan. Sayangnya RUU ini belum melakukan laporan kelayakan apakah RUU ini dibutuhkan dan penting di masyarakat.Katakunci: Perlindungan Hukum, Kontroversi dan Laporan Kelayakan


Author(s):  
Leah Henderson

Different views have been proposed about how Inference to the Best Explanation (IBE) and Bayesianism might be compatible with one another. One is a hybrid view, according to which explanatory considerations play a role in driving the Bayesian machinery. Another is an ‘emergent compatibilist’ view, in which an independently motivated Bayesian model of IBE is provided, so that explanatory considerations emerge from the Bayesian machinery rather than driving it. Specific scientific arguments can serve as test cases for these general views. The chapter argues that the case of Williams’ argument against group selection, discussed by Elliott Sober, is better understood with the emergent compatibilist picture, than with the hybrid view. This analysis of the case challenges Elliott Sober’s claim that the epistemic significance of appeals to the explanatory virtue of parsimony is highly case-specific. Instead, a more unified picture of IBE and its connection to Bayesianism is suggested.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document