Philosophy of Science
Routine science is a tortoise. Is fast science a hare?
Simulation of Trial Data to Test Speculative Hypotheses About Research Methods
We simulate trial data to test speculations about research methods, such as the impact of publication bias.
Sisyphean Science: Why Value Freedom is Worth Pursuing
We defend a novel version of the value-free ideal for science.
The Validity of the Argument from Inductive Risk
We offer a small improvement to the formal reconstruction of an important argument.
Justifying Scientific Progress
I defend a new account of scientific progress based on change in justification.
The Difference-to-Inference Model for Values in Science
Value-permeation in science is problematic when values make a difference to inferences.
Sex Differences in Sexual Desire
A premise of some sciences is that males are lusty and loose, while females are cool and coy. But is it true?
Conventional Choices in Outcome Measures Influence Meta-Analytic Results
Using simulated data, we show that a widely used scientific method is sensitive to arbitrary choices.
Thinking like a Bayesian illuminates the conditions under which evidence from trials and mechanistic evidence can be compelling.
The Problem of New Evidence: P-Hacking and Pre-Analysis Plans
Everyone says p-hacking is bad. We show precisely when it is... and when it isn't.
Robustness and Independent Evidence
Robustness arguments are popular. We use causal graphs to represent scenarios in which they fail.
A review of Robert Hudson's book about robustness.
Three Arguments for Absolute Outcome Measures
We use decision theory to show that a widely used form of analysing data is unreliable, and another form is best.
An Impossibility Theorem for Amalgamating Evidence
Amalgamating evidence faces an analogue to Arrow's famous impossibility theorem.
Absolute Measures of Effectiveness
Absolute measures of effectiveness of interventions are better than relative measures. We show why.
This paper offers an account of how the effectiveness of interventions should be measured.
Theory Choice and Social Choice: Okasha versus Sen
Okasha showed that theory choice faces an analogue to Arrow's theorem. Okasha's escape routes are not compelling.
Rerum Concordia Discors: Robustness and Discordant Multimodal Evidence
Robustness arguments are all the rage. But often they're a philosophical cheap trick.
Robustness, Discordance, and Relevance
Appeals to diversity of evidence are popular in philosophy of science. It's not so simple.
Philosophy of Medicine
Red Herrings about Relative Measures: A Response to Hoefer and Krauss
These authors criticised one of my articles, but they ignored all the arguments. This is my response.
Viruses Without Borders and the Medical Research Agenda
Many questions about medicine need sorting out, preferably prior to the next pandemic.
The Medicalization of Sexual Desire
Is low libido a disease? Some say yes. Others say no. Both sides are wrong.
Sensible Medicine — Balancing Intervention and Inaction During the COVID-19 Pandemic
Even in a pandemic, the best thing to do can be little.
Response to Commentaries on Medical Nihilism
Generous critics reviewed my book. I responded.
Pathways to Independence: A Plan to Produce and Use Trustworthy Evidence
A global team of researchers, clinicians, and regulators suggest how we can develop a medical system that is free of corrupting financial influences.
Drug Regulation and the Inductive Risk Calculus
I introduce the notion of 'inductive risk calculus', and argue that this calculus should be re-tuned for drug regulation.
New Directions in Philosophy of Medicine
Five philosophers of medicine describe the state of the art.
Clinical research does not reliably measure drug harms.
Three Criteria for Consensus Conferences
Consensus conferences bring experts together to increase public participation in science and to achieve consensus. They're not great at the latter.
Effectiveness of Medical Interventions
I defend a hybrid account of disease, which entails that for a medical intervention to be effective it must target the causal basis of a disease or the disease's harms (or both).
Herding QATs: Quality Assessment Tools for Evidence in Medicine
There are many tools to assess the quality of evidence from trials, and they differ widely in their content and in their measures of trial quality.
Harms of medical interventions are systematically underestimated in all stages of medical research.
Evidence hierarchies are used to assess evidence in medicine. They have many problems.
Is Meta-Analysis the Platinum Standard of Evidence?
No.
Miscellaneous
The Natural Probability Theory of Stereotypes
I describe a new account of stereotypes, based on a new account of generics, involving conditional probabilities.
Population Pluralism and Natural Selection
I defend a radical view which holds that there are many ways that a group of individuals can be causally related such that the group can evolve together.
If one has a reason to attain an end, then one has a reason to take means to that end. My formal account of reason transmission resolves a bunch of puzzles.
Evidence in Biology and the Conditions of Success
Some philosophers write about evidence in formal terms, while others characterise the features of evidence that matter to scientists.
A Theory of Evidence for Evidence-Based Policy
What evidence do policy-makers need?
'Population' is Not a Natural Kind of Kinds
The concept of 'population' in biology is not apt for a singular analysis, since biologists delineate populations however they need depending on their aims of inquiry.
The Chemical Characterization of the Gene: Vicissitudes of Evidential Assessment
The discovery that genes are constituted by DNA was very important. The evidential context of this discovery made the reception of this work complicated.