Jacob Stegenga, "Heart of Science: A Philosophy of Scientific Inquiry" (U Chicago Press, 2026)

10 snips

Mar 10, 2026

Jacob Stegenga, philosopher of science and professor at Nanyang Technological University, challenges truth-focused views in favor of assessing scientific justification. He discusses process vs product, common knowledge as science’s aim, publicity and trust, values in rapid pandemic science, and how diversity and standards shape proper scientific evaluation.

Ask episode

AI Snips

Chapters

Books

Transcript

Episode notes

ANECDOTE

Book Born From Rapid Drafting And Group Critique

The book emerged from Stegenga writing several draft chapters during a 2023 sabbatical with intensive PhD group feedback.
He produced six to seven chapters in months after circulating drafts to a rigorous research group at Cambridge.

INSIGHT

Justification Beats Truth For Real Time Evaluation

Evaluative concepts for science should prioritize justification over truth.
Jacob Stegenga argues process-focused assessment is practical because truth at the cutting edge is often unknowable in real time.

INSIGHT

Science Aims For Common Knowledge Not Private Belief

The constitutive aim of science is common knowledge, a truth with broad consensus about both claim and justification.
Stegenga defines common knowledge as public, mutually justified scientific findings that enable cooperation and policy action.

Get the Snipd Podcast app to discover more snips from this episode

Get the app

In Heart of Science: A Philosophy of Scientific Inquiry (University of Chicago Press, 2026), philosopher Jacob Stegenga breaks with the most dominant epistemologies of science to argue that in judging scientific activity, we should focus on its justification, not the achievement of truth or knowledge. Yet, Stegenga argues, the aim of science goes far beyond justification and is, instead, a special kind of truth—common knowledge, a broadly shared and mutually justified scientific finding.

Drawing on both historical examples and recent events like the COVID-19 pandemic, Stegenga outlines his approach before delving into its implications for scientific evaluation, testimony, values, progress, and credit, as well as the nature of science during times of crisis. Truth, he shows, may not be easily identified in the short term. However, an evaluation of scientific justification, grounded in shared standards, is possible. This framework helps us appraise—and appreciate—historical theories that ultimately weren’t accurate and offers fresh insights about appropriate science communication and public trust in scientific research. Justification and scientific rigor are not just means to an end, Stegenga writes, but the very heart of good science.
Ambitious, authoritative, and accessible, Heart of Science offers a new vision for the philosophy of science.

Jacob Stegenga is professor of philosophy in the School of Humanities at Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. He is the author of Medical Nihilism and Care and Cure: An Introduction to Philosophy of Medicine

Morteza Hajizadeh is a Ph.D. graduate in English from the University of Auckland in New Zealand. His research interests are Cultural Studies; Critical Theory; Environmental History; Medieval (Intellectual) History; Gothic Studies; 18th and 19th Century British Literature.

YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/a48266/videos

Twitter: https://twitter.com/TalkArtCulture

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/critical-theory

Jacob Stegenga, "Heart of Science: ﻿A Philosophy of Scientific Inquiry" (U Chicago Press, 2026)

Book Born From Rapid Drafting And Group Critique

Justification Beats Truth For Real Time Evaluation

Science Aims For Common Knowledge Not Private Belief

Jacob Stegenga, "Heart of Science: A Philosophy of Scientific Inquiry" (U Chicago Press, 2026)