对批评的回应。

Yafeng Shan, Jon Williamson
{"title":"对批评的回应。","authors":"Yafeng Shan,&nbsp;Jon Williamson","doi":"10.1007/s44204-025-00302-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Responding to the critical commentaries by Rosa Runhardt, Erik Weber, and Michael Wilde, we defend the application of Evidential Pluralism to the social sciences.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":93890,"journal":{"name":"Asian journal of philosophy","volume":"4 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12279585/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Responses to criticisms\",\"authors\":\"Yafeng Shan,&nbsp;Jon Williamson\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s44204-025-00302-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Responding to the critical commentaries by Rosa Runhardt, Erik Weber, and Michael Wilde, we defend the application of Evidential Pluralism to the social sciences.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93890,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asian journal of philosophy\",\"volume\":\"4 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12279585/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asian journal of philosophy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s44204-025-00302-x\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian journal of philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s44204-025-00302-x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在回应罗萨·伦哈特、埃里克·韦伯和迈克尔·王尔德的批评性评论时,我们为证据多元主义在社会科学中的应用辩护。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Responses to criticisms

Responding to the critical commentaries by Rosa Runhardt, Erik Weber, and Michael Wilde, we defend the application of Evidential Pluralism to the social sciences.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信