Science and Informed, Counterfactual, Democratic Consent

Philosophy of Science 82 (5):1284-1295 (2015)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
On many science-related policy questions, the public is unable to make informed decisions, because of its inability to make use of knowledge obtained by scientists. Philip Kitcher and James Fishkin have both suggested therefore that on certain science-related issues, public policy should not be decided on by actual democratic vote, but should instead conform to the public’s counterfactual informed democratic decision. Indeed, this suggestion underlies Kitcher’s specification of an ideal of a well-ordered science. This article argues that this suggestion misconstrues the normative significance of CIDDs. At most, CIDDs might have epistemic significance, but no authority or legitimizing force
Reprint years
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Revision history
Archival date: 2014-09-07
View upload history
References found in this work BETA

View all 15 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total views
177 ( #18,640 of 43,009 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
45 ( #15,218 of 43,009 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.