In this much-anticipated revision and translation of Scienza e Retorica, Marcello Pera argues that rhetoric is central to the making of scientific knowledge. Pera begins with an attack of what he calls the "Cartesian syndrome"--the fixation on method common to both defenders of traditional philosophy of science and its detractors. He argues that in assuming the primacy of methodological rules, both sides get it wrong. Scientific knowledge is neither the simple mirror of nature nor a cultural construct imposed by contingent (...) interests, thus we must replace the idea of the scientific method with that of scientific rhetoric. Pera proposes a new dialectics of science to overcome the tension between normative and descriptive philosophies of science by focusing on the rhetoric in the proposition, defense, and argumentation of theories. Examining the uses of rhetoric in debates drawn from Galileo’s Dialogues, Darwin’s Origins, and the Big Bang-Steady State controversy in cosmology, Pera shows how the conduct of science involves not just nature and the inquiring mind, but nature, the inquiring mind, and a questioning community which, through the process of attack, defense, and dispute, determines what is science. Rhetoric, then, is an essential element in the constitution of science as the practice of persuasive argumentation through which results gain acceptance. (shrink)

Traditionally it has been thought that scientific controversies can always be resolved on the basis of empirical data. Recently, however, social constructionists have claimed that the outcome of scientific debates is strongly influenced by non-evidential factors such as the rhetorical prowess and professional clout of the participants. This volume of previously unpublished essays by well-known philosophers of science presents historical studies and philosophical analyses that undermine the plausibility of an extreme social constructionist perspective while also indicating the need for a (...) richer and more realistic account of scientific rationality. (shrink)

Although the recent, history-oriented philosophy of science has greatly contributed to the changes in many received views, a Cartesian syndrome seems still to affect many philosophers. Such a syndrome is the combination of the ideas that scientific research pursues its goals by obeying certain universal and impersonal rules, and that violating these rules leads to irrationality. This paper aims at suggesting a view which slips between these two horns. It maintains that scientific rationality does not depend on the respect of (...) a mythical Methodological Code but on the kind of arguments scientists put forward in support of their claims in a dialectical setting. The recent cosmological debate is examined as an illustration and a tentative outline of the procedural and substantive basis of scientific dialectics is proposed. (shrink)

This study reviews the existing literature on psychiatric interventions for individuals affected by the COVID-19 epidemic. My article cumulates previous research on how extreme stressors associated with COVID-19 may aggravate or cause psychiatric problems. The unpredictability of the COVID-19 epidemic progression may result in significant psychological pressure on vulnerable populations. Persons with psychiatric illnesses may experience worsening symptoms or may develop an altered mental state related to an increased suicide risk. The inspected findings prove that psychological intervention measures for patients (...) affected by the epidemic should be designed and personalized adequately. Preventive measures seek to decrease infection rates and cut down the risk of the public healthcare system to eventually be overburdened. Throughout the COVID-19 crisis, people with psychiatric illnesses may confront a decrease in mental health services. As limitations in the current review, by focusing only on articles published in journals indexed in Web of Science, Scopus, and ProQuest, I inevitably disregarded other valuable sources. Subsequent research directions should clarify the effectiveness of online mental health services in providing remote psychiatric interventions to individuals affected by the COVID-19 epidemic. (shrink)

Behavioral interventions have shown promising neuroprotective effects, but the cascade of molecular, brain and behavioral changes involved in these benefits remains poorly understood. Projecte Moviment is a 12-week multi-domain, single-blind, proof-of-concept randomized controlled trial examining the cognitive effect and underlying mechanisms of an aerobic exercise, computerized cognitive training and a combined groups compared to a waitlist control group. Adherence was > 80% for 82/109 participants recruited. In this study we report intervention-related changes in plasma biomarkers and structural-MRI and how they (...) related to changes in physical activity and individual variables and their potential role as mediators in the cognitive changes. Our results show that although there were no significant changes in molecular biomarker concentrations in any intervention group, changes in ICAM-1 and SDF1-α were negatively associated with changes in physical activity outcomes in AE and COMB groups. Brain volume changes were found in the CCT showing a significant increase in precuneus volume. Sex moderated the brain volume change in the AE and COMB groups, suggesting that men may benefit more than women. Changes in molecular biomarkers and brain volumes did not significantly mediate the cognitive-related benefits found previously for any group. This study shows crucial initial molecular and brain volume changes related to lifestyle interventions at early stages and highlights the value of examining activity parameters, individual difference characteristics and using a multi-level analysis approach to address these questions. (shrink)

This paper analyses whether current explainable AI (XAI) techniques can help to address taxpayer concerns about the use of AI in taxation. As tax authorities around the world increase their use of AI-based techniques, taxpayers are increasingly at a loss about whether and how the ensuing decisions follow the procedures required by law and respect their substantive rights. The use of XAI has been proposed as a response to this issue, but it is still an open question whether current XAI (...) techniques are enough to meet existing legal requirements. The paper approaches this question in the context of a case study: a prototype tax fraud detector trained on an anonymized dataset of real-world cases handled by the Buenos Aires (Argentina) tax authority. The decisions produced by this detector are explained through the use of various classification methods, and the outputs of these explanation models are evaluated on their explanatory power and on their compliance with the legal obligation that tax authorities provide the rationale behind their decision-making. We conclude the paper by suggesting technical and legal approaches for designing explanation mechanisms that meet the needs of legal explanation in the tax domain. (shrink)