@article {4254511,
	title = {The semantics of untrustworthiness},
	journal = {Topoi. An International Reiew of Philosophy},
	year = {In Press},
	abstract = {<p>We oer a formal treatment of the semantics of both complete and incomplete mistrustful or distrustful information transmissions. The se- mantics of such relations is analysed in view of rules that dene the be- haviour of a receiving agent. We justify this approach in view of human agent communications and secure system design. We further specify some properties of such relations.</p>},
	issn = {1316-5011},
	doi = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11245-013-9227-2},
	author = {Primiero, Giuseppe and Kosolosky, Laszlo}
}
@article {4443718,
	title = {Social epistemology meets the philosophy of the humanities},
	journal = {Foundations of science},
	volume = {21 (1)},
	year = {2016},
	abstract = {<p>From time to time, when I explain to a new acquaintance that Im a philosopher of science, my interlocutor will nod agreeably and remark that that surely means Im interested in the ethical status of various kinds of scientific research, the impact that science has had on our values, or the role that the sciences play in contemporary democracies. Although this common response hardly corresponds to what professional philosophers of science have done for the past decades, or even centuries, it is perfectly comprehensible. For there are large questions of the kinds just indicated, questions that deserve to be posed and answered, and an intelligent person might well think that philosophers of science are the people who do the posing and the answering (Kitcher in Science, truth and democracy. Oxford University Press, Oxford, p. xi, 2001).</p>},
	doi = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10699-014-9372-0},
	author = {Froeyman, Anton and Kosolosky, Laszlo and Van Bouwel, Jeroen}
}
