<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rdf:RDF
   xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
   xmlns:rdfs="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"
   xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/"
   xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
   xmlns:prism="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/1.2/basic/"
   xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"

>
<channel rdf:about="http://www.citeulike.org/about">
<pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 21:29:59 BST</pubDate>


	<title>CiteULike: Tag value_judgment</title>
	<description>CiteULike: Tag value_judgment</description>


	<link>http://www.citeulike.org/tag/value_judgment</link>
	<dc:publisher>CiteULike.org</dc:publisher>
	<dc:language>en-gb</dc:language>
	<dc:rights>Copyright &#169; 2004-2008 citeulike.org</dc:rights>
	<items>
    <rdf:Seq>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.citeulike.org/user/wandall/article/774935"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.citeulike.org/user/wandall/article/1199687"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.citeulike.org/user/wandall/article/2141550"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.citeulike.org/user/wandall/article/938219"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.citeulike.org/user/wandall/article/1338508"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.citeulike.org/user/wandall/article/1180545"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.citeulike.org/user/wandall/article/937916"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.citeulike.org/user/wandall/article/938283"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.citeulike.org/user/wandall/article/237183"/>

	</rdf:Seq>
	</items>
	</channel>


<item rdf:about="http://www.citeulike.org/user/wandall/article/774935">
    <title>The hard art of soft science: Evidence-Based Medicine, Reasoned Medicine or both?</title>
    <link>http://www.citeulike.org/user/wandall/article/774935</link>
    <description>&lt;i&gt;Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, Vol. 12, No. 4. (August 2006), pp. 410-419.&lt;/i&gt;</description>
    <dc:title>The hard art of soft science: Evidence-Based Medicine, Reasoned Medicine or both?</dc:title>

    <dc:creator>Milos Jenicek</dc:creator>
    <dc:identifier>doi:10.1111/j.1365-2753.2006.00718.x</dc:identifier>
    <dc:source>Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, Vol. 12, No. 4. (August 2006), pp. 410-419.</dc:source>
    <dc:date>2006-07-26T19:37:12-00:00</dc:date>
    <prism:publicationYear>2006</prism:publicationYear>
    <prism:publicationName>Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice</prism:publicationName>
    <prism:issn>1356-1294</prism:issn>
    <prism:volume>12</prism:volume>
    <prism:number>4</prism:number>
    <prism:startingPage>410</prism:startingPage>
    <prism:endingPage>419</prism:endingPage>
    <prism:publisher>Blackwell Publishing</prism:publisher>
    <prism:category>evidence</prism:category>
    <prism:category>evidence-based</prism:category>
    <prism:category>expertise</prism:category>
    <prism:category>scientific_controversy</prism:category>
    <prism:category>value_judgment</prism:category>
</item>



<item rdf:about="http://www.citeulike.org/user/wandall/article/1199687">
    <title>Natural Reasons: Personality and Polity</title>
    <link>http://www.citeulike.org/user/wandall/article/1199687</link>
    <description>&lt;i&gt;(01 August 1992)&lt;/i&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Hurley here revives a classical idea about rationality in a modern framework, by developing analogies between the structure of personality and the structure of society in the context of contemporary work in philosophy of mind, ethics, decision theory and social choice theory. The book examines the rationality of decisions and actions, and illustrates the continuity of philosophy of mind on the one hand, and ethics and jurisprudence on the other. A major thesis of the book is that arguments drawn from the philosophy of mind may be used to undermine widely-held subjectivist positions in ethics and politico-economic theory. The work is inspired by the philosophies of Wittgenstein and Davidson, but goes on to connect their arguments about interpretation with formal work in decision theory and social choice theory, and with the theory of adjudication.</description>
    <dc:title>Natural Reasons: Personality and Polity</dc:title>

    <dc:creator>SL Hurley</dc:creator>
    <dc:source>(01 August 1992)</dc:source>
    <dc:date>2007-03-31T13:14:48-00:00</dc:date>
    <prism:publicationYear>1992</prism:publicationYear>
    <prism:publisher>Oxford University Press</prism:publisher>
    <prism:category>judgement</prism:category>
    <prism:category>judgment</prism:category>
    <prism:category>value</prism:category>
    <prism:category>value_judgment</prism:category>
</item>



<item rdf:about="http://www.citeulike.org/user/wandall/article/2141550">
    <title>Must the Scientist Make Value Judgments?</title>
    <link>http://www.citeulike.org/user/wandall/article/2141550</link>
    <description>&lt;i&gt;The Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 57, No. 11. (1960), pp. 345-357.&lt;/i&gt;</description>
    <dc:title>Must the Scientist Make Value Judgments?</dc:title>

    <dc:creator>Isaac Levi</dc:creator>
    <dc:source>The Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 57, No. 11. (1960), pp. 345-357.</dc:source>
    <dc:date>2007-12-18T16:33:17-00:00</dc:date>
    <prism:publicationYear>1960</prism:publicationYear>
    <prism:publicationName>The Journal of Philosophy</prism:publicationName>
    <prism:volume>57</prism:volume>
    <prism:number>11</prism:number>
    <prism:startingPage>345</prism:startingPage>
    <prism:endingPage>357</prism:endingPage>
    <prism:category>value</prism:category>
    <prism:category>value_judgment</prism:category>
</item>



<item rdf:about="http://www.citeulike.org/user/wandall/article/938219">
    <title>Values in Science</title>
    <link>http://www.citeulike.org/user/wandall/article/938219</link>
    <description>&lt;i&gt;&lt;/i&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;This paper argues that the appraisal of theory is in important respects closer in structure to value-judgement than it is to the rule-governed inference that the classical tradition in philosophy of science took for granted.</description>
    <dc:title>Values in Science</dc:title>

    <dc:creator>Ernan Mcmullin</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2006-11-09T19:19:16-00:00</dc:date>
    <prism:category>philosophy_of_science</prism:category>
    <prism:category>value</prism:category>
    <prism:category>value_judgment</prism:category>
</item>



<item rdf:about="http://www.citeulike.org/user/wandall/article/1338508">
    <title>Value-Judgements, Prescriptive Language, and Imperatives</title>
    <link>http://www.citeulike.org/user/wandall/article/1338508</link>
    <description>&lt;i&gt;The Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 23, No. 92. (1973), pp. 253-257.&lt;/i&gt;</description>
    <dc:title>Value-Judgements, Prescriptive Language, and Imperatives</dc:title>

    <dc:creator>Winston Nesbitt</dc:creator>
    <dc:source>The Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 23, No. 92. (1973), pp. 253-257.</dc:source>
    <dc:date>2007-05-28T10:55:51-00:00</dc:date>
    <prism:publicationYear>1973</prism:publicationYear>
    <prism:publicationName>The Philosophical Quarterly</prism:publicationName>
    <prism:volume>23</prism:volume>
    <prism:number>92</prism:number>
    <prism:startingPage>253</prism:startingPage>
    <prism:endingPage>257</prism:endingPage>
    <prism:category>hare</prism:category>
    <prism:category>prescription</prism:category>
    <prism:category>value</prism:category>
    <prism:category>value_judgment</prism:category>
</item>



<item rdf:about="http://www.citeulike.org/user/wandall/article/1180545">
    <title>Cognitive and Social Values</title>
    <link>http://www.citeulike.org/user/wandall/article/1180545</link>
    <description>&lt;i&gt;Science &#38; Education, Vol. 8, No. 1. (1 January 1999), pp. 45-54.&lt;/i&gt;</description>
    <dc:title>Cognitive and Social Values</dc:title>

    <dc:creator>Peter Machamer</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>Heather Douglas</dc:creator>
    <dc:identifier>doi:10.1023/A:1008664519150</dc:identifier>
    <dc:source>Science &#38; Education, Vol. 8, No. 1. (1 January 1999), pp. 45-54.</dc:source>
    <dc:date>2007-03-22T11:30:02-00:00</dc:date>
    <prism:publicationYear>1999</prism:publicationYear>
    <prism:publicationName>Science &#38; Education</prism:publicationName>
    <prism:volume>8</prism:volume>
    <prism:number>1</prism:number>
    <prism:startingPage>45</prism:startingPage>
    <prism:endingPage>54</prism:endingPage>
    <prism:category>epistemic_values</prism:category>
    <prism:category>goal</prism:category>
    <prism:category>social_value</prism:category>
    <prism:category>value</prism:category>
    <prism:category>value_judgment</prism:category>
</item>



<item rdf:about="http://www.citeulike.org/user/wandall/article/937916">
    <title>The Scientist Qua Scientist Makes Value Judgments</title>
    <link>http://www.citeulike.org/user/wandall/article/937916</link>
    <description>&lt;i&gt;Philosophy of Science, Vol. 20, No. 1. (1953), pp. 1-6.&lt;/i&gt;</description>
    <dc:title>The Scientist Qua Scientist Makes Value Judgments</dc:title>

    <dc:creator>Richard Rudner</dc:creator>
    <dc:source>Philosophy of Science, Vol. 20, No. 1. (1953), pp. 1-6.</dc:source>
    <dc:date>2006-11-09T15:17:02-00:00</dc:date>
    <prism:publicationYear>1953</prism:publicationYear>
    <prism:publicationName>Philosophy of Science</prism:publicationName>
    <prism:volume>20</prism:volume>
    <prism:number>1</prism:number>
    <prism:startingPage>1</prism:startingPage>
    <prism:endingPage>6</prism:endingPage>
    <prism:category>philosophy</prism:category>
    <prism:category>value</prism:category>
    <prism:category>value_judgment</prism:category>
</item>



<item rdf:about="http://www.citeulike.org/user/wandall/article/938283">
    <title>Science and Values: Are Value Judgments Always Irrelevant to the Justification of Scientific Claims?</title>
    <link>http://www.citeulike.org/user/wandall/article/938283</link>
    <description>&lt;i&gt;&lt;/i&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Several feminist theorists have claimed that feminist values ought to influence theory choice. Susan Haack has argued that this is implausible because normative claims about what ought to be the case can never provide justification for descriptive claims. I argue against one of the premises of Haack's argument. Furthermore, I attempt to show that the most promising defense of this premise would cast doubt on a second premise of Haack's argument. My aim is to open up the possibility that value judgments can play a legitimate role in theory choice.</description>
    <dc:title>Science and Values: Are Value Judgments Always Irrelevant to the Justification of Scientific Claims?</dc:title>

    <dc:creator>Kristen Intemann</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2006-11-09T20:15:42-00:00</dc:date>
    <prism:category>scientific_practice</prism:category>
    <prism:category>value</prism:category>
    <prism:category>value_judgment</prism:category>
</item>



<item rdf:about="http://www.citeulike.org/user/wandall/article/237183">
    <title>Consequences, Ethical Obligations, IRIS, NAS Reviews and Perchlorate in Drinking Water</title>
    <link>http://www.citeulike.org/user/wandall/article/237183</link>
    <description>&lt;i&gt;Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, Vol. 11, No. 3. (June 2005), pp. 477-482.&lt;/i&gt;</description>
    <dc:title>Consequences, Ethical Obligations, IRIS, NAS Reviews and Perchlorate in Drinking Water</dc:title>

    <dc:creator>David Brown</dc:creator>
    <dc:identifier>doi:10.1080/10807030590968932</dc:identifier>
    <dc:source>Human and Ecological Risk Assessment, Vol. 11, No. 3. (June 2005), pp. 477-482.</dc:source>
    <dc:date>2005-06-25T10:30:49-00:00</dc:date>
    <prism:publicationYear>2005</prism:publicationYear>
    <prism:publicationName>Human and Ecological Risk Assessment</prism:publicationName>
    <prism:issn>1080-7039</prism:issn>
    <prism:volume>11</prism:volume>
    <prism:number>3</prism:number>
    <prism:startingPage>477</prism:startingPage>
    <prism:endingPage>482</prism:endingPage>
    <prism:publisher>Taylor and Francis Ltd</prism:publisher>
    <prism:category>exposure</prism:category>
    <prism:category>iris</prism:category>
    <prism:category>value</prism:category>
    <prism:category>value_judgment</prism:category>
</item>



</rdf:RDF>

