Радость науки. Важнейшие основы рационального мышления

44. Kuhn, Thomas S. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 50th anniversary ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2012.

45. Lewens, Tim. The Meaning of Science: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science. London: Penguin Press, 2015.

46. Ling, Rich. “Confirmation bias in the era of mobile news consumption: The social and psychological dimensions.” Digital Journalism 8, no. 5 (2020): 596–604. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2020.1766987

47. Lipton, Peter. “Does the truth matter in science?” Arts and Humanities in Higher Education 4, no. 2 (2005):173–83. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474022205051965; Royal Society 2004; Medawar Lecture, “The truth about science.” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 360, no. 1458 (2005): 1259 69. https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/abs/10.1098/rstb.2005.1660

48. Lipton, Peter. “Inference to the best explanation.” In A Companion to the Philosophy of Science, edited by W. H. Newton-Smith, 184–93. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2000.

49. MacCoun, Robert, and Saul Perlmutter. “Blind analysis: Hide results to seek the truth.” Nature 526 (2015): 187–89. https://doi.org/10.1038/526187a

50. McGrath, April. “Dealing with dissonance: A review of cognitive dissonance reduction.” Social and Personality Psychology Compass 11, no. 12 (2017): 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12362

51. McIntyre, Lee. Post-Truth. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2018.

52. Nickerson, Raymond S. “Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises.” Review of General Psychology. 2, no. 2 (1998): 175–220. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089–2680.2.2.175

53. Norgaard, Kari Marie. Living in Denial: Climate Change, Emotions, and Everyday Life. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2011. JSTOR: http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt5hhfvf

54. Oreskes, Naomi. Why Trust Science? Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2019.

55. Pinker, Steven. The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined. New York: Viking Books, 2011.

56. Popper, Karl R. The Logic of Scientific Discovery. London: Hutchinson & Co., 1959; London and New York: Routledge, 1992. Original title: Logik der Forschung: Zur Erkenntnistheorie der modernen Naturwissenschaft. Vienna: Julius Springer, 1935.

57. Radnitz, Scott, and Patrick Underwood. “Is belief in conspiracy theories pathological? A survey experiment on the cognitive roots of extreme suspicion.” British Journal of Political Science 47, no. 1 (2017): 113–29. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123414000556

58. Ritchie, Stuart. Science Fictions: Exposing Fraud, Bias, Negligence and Hype in Science. London: The Bodley Head, 2020.

59. Sagan, Carl. The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark. New York: Random House, 1995. Reprint, New York: Paw Prints, 2008.

60. Scheufele, Dietram A., and Nicole M. Krause. “Science audiences, misinformation, and fake news.” PNAS 116, no. 16 (2019): 7662–69. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1805871115

61. Schmidt, Paul F. “Some criticisms of cultural relativism.” The Journal of Philosophy 52, no. 25 (1955): 780–91. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2022285

62. Tressoldi Patrizio E. “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence: The case of non-local perception, a classical and Bayesian review of evidences.” Frontiers in Psychology 2 (2011): 117. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00117/full

63. Vickers, John. “The problem of induction.” The Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy, Spring 2018. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/induction-problem/

64. Zagury-Orly, Ivry, and Richard M. Schwartzstein. “Covid-19—A reminder to reason.” New England Journal of Medicine 383 (2020): e12. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp 2009405