Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Looking beyond values: The legitimacy of social perspectives, opinions and interests in science.Hannah Hilligardt - 2022 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 12 (4):1-20.
    This paper critically assesses the current debates in philosophy of science that focus on the concept of values. In these debates, it is often assumed that all relevant non-epistemic influences on scientific research can be described as values and, consequently, that science carries social legitimacy if the correct values play their proper role in research. I argue that values are _not_ the only relevant non-epistemic influences on research: not unless our definition of values is so broad that it becomes unmanageable. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Science Advice in an Environment of Trust: Trusted, but Not Trustworthy?Torbjørn Gundersen & Cathrine Holst - 2022 - Social Epistemology 36 (5):629-640.
    This paper examines the conditions of trustworthy science advice mechanisms, in which scientists have a mandated role to inform public policymaking. Based on the literature on epistemic trust and public trust in science, we argue that possession of relevant expertise, justified moral and political considerations, as well as proper institutional design are conditions for trustworthy science advice. In order to assess these conditions further, we explore the case of temporary advisory committees in Norway. These committees exemplify a de facto trusted (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Relationally Responsive Expert Trustworthiness.Ben Almassi - 2022 - Social Epistemology 36 (5):576-585.
    Social epistemologists often operationalize the task of indirectly assessing experts’ trustworthiness to identifying whose beliefs are more reliably true on matters in an area of expertise. Not only does this neglect the philosophically rich space between belief formation and testimonial utterances, it also reduces trustworthiness to reliability. In ethics of trust, by contrast, explicitly relational views of trust include things like good will and responsiveness. One might think that relational aspects can be safely set aside for social epistemology of trust (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Book Forum.Maya J. Goldenberg - 2022 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 96 (C):121-124.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Should one trust experts?Hein Duijf - 2021 - Synthese 199 (3-4):9289-9312.
    Should one trust experts? My answer to this question is a qualified ‘no’. In this paper I explore the conditions under which it is rational to trust and defer to experts, and those under which it may be rational to refrain from doing so. I draw on two important factors for an actor’s trust in a partner: trust depends on the partner’s competence and on the partner’s interests. I propose that the conditions under which it is rational to trust and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Our Epistemic Duties in Scenarios of Vaccine Mistrust.M. Inés Corbalán & Giulia Terzian - 2021 - International Journal of Philosophical Studies 29 (4):613-640.
    ABSTRACT What, if anything, should we do when someone says they don’t believe in anthropogenic climate change? Or that they worry that a COVID-19 vaccine might be dangerous? We argue that in general, we face an epistemic duty to object to such assertions, qua instances of science denial and science sceptical discourse, respectively. Our argument builds on recent discussions in social epistemology, specifically surrounding the idea that we ought to speak up against (epistemically) problematic assertions so as to fulfil an (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations