Switch to: References

Citations of:

Science, Policy, and the Value-Free Ideal

Heather Douglas

University of Pittsburgh Press (2009)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.

Scientific expertise, risk assessment, and majority voting.Thomas Boyer-Kassem - unknowndetails Scientists are often asked to advise political institutions on pressing risk-related questions, like climate change or the authorization of medical drugs. Given that deliberation will often not eliminate all disagreements between scientists, how should their risk assessments be aggregated? I argue that this problem is distinct from two familiar and well-studied problems in the literature: judgment aggregation and probability aggregation. I introduce a novel decision-theoretic model where risk assessments are compared with acceptability thresholds. Majority voting is then defended by means (...) of robustness considerations. (shrink) Download Export citation Bookmark
Challenging the Dichotomy of Cognitive and Non-Cognitive Values: Feminist Values and Evolutionary Psychology.Silvia Ivani & Jan Sprenger - unknowndetails Philosophy of science has seen a passionate debate over the influence of non-cognitive values on theory choice. In this paper, we argue against a dichotomous divide between cognitive and non-cognitive values and for the possibility of a dual role for feminist values. By analyzing the influence of feminist values on evolutionary psychology and evolutionary biology, we show how they have cognitive and non-cognitive functions at the same time. Download Export citation Bookmark
Geoengineering Tensions.Adrian Currie - forthcoming - Futures.details There has been much discussion of the moral, legal and prudential implications of geoengineering, and of governance structures for both the research and deployment of such technologies. However, insufficient attention has been paid to how such measures might affect geoengineering in terms of the incentive structures which underwrite scientific progress. There is a tension between the features that make science productive, and the need to govern geoengineering research, which has thus far gone underappreciated. I emphasize how geoengineering research requires governance (...) Download Export citation Bookmark 2 citations
Researchers Building Nations: Under what conditions can overtly political research be objective?Inkeri Koskinen - 2015 - In Uskali Mäki, Stéphanie Ruphy & Ioannis Votsis (eds.), Recent Developments in the Philosophy of Science: EPSA13 Helsinki. Cham: pp. 129–140.details The idea that in order to be objective, research should be value-free, has recently been questioned in philosophy of science. I concentrate on two senses of objectivity, detached objectivity and interactive objectivity that do not require value-freedom. I use each of these to assess a young, strongly value-laden and overtly political discipline: indigenous studies. It has been criticised as relativistic and essentialistic, and in consequence, as not objective in the detached sense of objectivity, as values are used in place of (...) Download Export citation Bookmark 5 citations
Scientific Pluralism and Inconsistency Toleration.Dunja Šešelja - 2017 - Humana Mente 10 (32):1-29.details In this paper I examine the problem of inconsistency toleration in the context of scientific pluralism. I argue that, first of all, the notion of inconsistency toleration has to be qualified with respect to the evaluative attitude that one takes towards a given scientific theory or theories. Second, I show which types of inconsistency toleration are compatible with two major approaches to scientific pluralism, the so-called modest and the radical one. In view of this I suggest some points of demarcation (...) between these two approaches. (shrink) Download Export citation Bookmark 2 citations
False Precision, Surprise and Improved Uncertainty Assessment.Wendy S. Parker & James S. Risbey - 2015 - Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A 373 (2055):20140453.details An uncertainty report describes the extent of an agent’s uncertainty about some matter. We identify two basic requirements for uncertainty reports, which we call faithfulness and completeness. We then discuss two pitfalls of uncertainty assessment that often result in reports that fail to meet these requirements. The first involves adopting a one-size-fits-all approach to the representation of uncertainty, while the second involves failing to take account of the risk of surprises. In connection with the latter, we respond to the objection (...) Download Export citation Bookmark 9 citations

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9