Scepticism and the science of global warming: a rejoinder

Thomas Bryce, Stephen P. Day

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

2 Citations (Scopus)
70 Downloads (Pure)


An adequate epistemology of science will not, as some Old Deferentialists expected [pre-Kuhnian thinkers who held that science progresses by the accumulation of well-confirmed truths], be exclusively logical, but will have a social dimension. Unlike the New Cynicism [of post-Kuhnian critics who write about science with factitious despair], however, it will not see the fact that science is a social enterprise as illegitimating its epistemic pretensions, but as an important factor contributing to its epistemic distinction; not as a reason for favoring the notion of acceptance and neglecting warrant, but as an important factor helping to keep warrant and acceptance appropriately correlated. Puzzling out science, Susan Haack (1995, p. 27). This paper is a rejoinder to the three forum pieces stimulated by our original article in this journal: ‘Scepticism and doubt in science and science education: the complexity of global warming as a socio-scientific issue’ (Bryce and Day 2014).
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1025-1037
Number of pages12
JournalCultural Studies of Science Education
Issue number4
Early online date21 Nov 2014
Publication statusPublished - 1 Dec 2014


  • scepticism
  • global warming
  • science education


Dive into the research topics of 'Scepticism and the science of global warming: a rejoinder'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this