frank [dot] zenker [at] fil [dot] lu [dot] se
Publikationer (hämtat ur Lunds universitets publikationsdatabas)
- Basic Concepts of Structuralism
- Commentary on Mark Battersby and Sharon Bailin’s “Critical Thinking and Cognitive Biases.”
- Editors' introduction: social dynamics and collective rationality
- From Euler to Navier-Stokes: A Spatial Analysis of Conceptual Changes in Nineteenth-century Fluid Dynamics
- From Features via Frames to Spaces: Modeling Scientific Conceptual Change Without Incommensurability or Aprioricity
- Know thy biases! Bringing argumentative virtues to the classroom
- Modeling diachronic changes in structuralism and conceptual spaces
- Perspectives on Structuralism: preface
- Pro-et-contra Argumentation : Gründe, Werte, Kompromisse (Reasons, Values, Compromises).
- Review of Spohn, W. The Laws of Belief (2012). Oxford: OUP.
- In Support of the Weak Rhetoric as Epistemic Thesis. On the Generality and Reliability of Persuasion Knowledge
- Perspectives on Structuralism, Munich, Germany, 16-18 February 2012
- Theory change as dimensional change: Conceptual spaces applied to the dynamics of empirical theories
- What do Normative Approaches to Argumentation Stand to Gain from Rhetorical Insights
- Commentary on F. Macagno’s ‘Implicatures and Hierarchies of Presumptions
- Conference Report. European Network Meeting, Lund, March 2011.
- Copenhagen Lund Workshops in Social Epistemology (February and September 2011)
- Deduction, Induction, Conduction. An Attempt at Unifying Natural Language Argument Structures
- Designing an Introductory Course in Elementary Symbolic Logic within the Blackboard e-Learning Environment
- Editor's Introduction
- Experts and Bias: When is the Interest-Based Objection to an Authority Argument Sound?
- Foundations for Nothing and Facts for Free
- Parmenides as Secret Hero
- Thank Goodness–Parking Tickets aren’t Tax Deductible: Practical advice on filing for tax returns.
- Using Conceptual Spaces to Model the Dynamics of Empirical Theories
- Why Study the Overlap Between “Ought” and “Is” Anyways? On Empirically Investigating the Conventional Validity of the Pragma-Dialectical Discussion Rules
- Ceteris Paribus in Conservative Epistemic Change
- Review of F.H. van Eemeren & B. Garssen (eds) (2008). Controversy and Confrontation. Amsterdam: John Benjamis.
- Treating Kuhn’s Gap with Critical Contextualism. Review of William Rehg (2009). Cogent Science in Context. The Science Wars, Argumentation Theory and Habermas, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.