Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T05:46:05.607Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The logic of challenging research into bias and social disparity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 May 2022

Regina Rini Open the ORCID record for Regina Rini [Opens in a new window]
Regina Rini*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, York University, Toronto, ON M3J 1P3, Canada. rarini@yorku.careginarini.net
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

There are two problems with the logic of Cesario's argument for abandoning existing research on social bias. First, laboratory findings of decisional bias have social significance even if Cesario is right that the research strips away real-world context. Second, the argument makes overly skeptical demands of a research program seeking complex causal linkages between micro- and macro-scale phenomena.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 45 , 2022 , e90
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Basu, R. (2019). What we epistemically owe to each other. Philosophical Studies, 176(4), 915–931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolinger, R. J. (2020). The rational impermissibility of accepting (some) racial generalizations. Synthese, 197(6), 2415–2431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mallon, R. (2021). Racial attitudes, accumulation mechanisms, and disparities. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 12, 953–975. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13164-020-00521-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moss, S. (2018). Moral encroachment. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 118(2), 177–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar