Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T20:45:58.114Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Thinking about Values in Science: Ethical versus Political Approaches

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 October 2020

S. Andrew Schroeder Open the ORCID record for S. Andrew Schroeder [Opens in a new window]
S. Andrew Schroeder*
Affiliation:
Claremont McKenna College, Claremont, CA, USA
*
Email: aschroeder@cmc.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Philosophers of science now broadly agree that doing good science involves making non-epistemic value judgments. I call attention to two very different normative standards which can be used to evaluate such judgments: standards grounded in ethics and standards grounded in political philosophy. Though this distinction has not previously been highlighted, I show that the values in science literature contain arguments of each type. I conclude by explaining why this distinction is important. Seeking to determine whether some value-laden determination meets substantive ethical standards is a very different endeavor from seeking to determine if it is politically legitimate.

Keywords

Values in scienceethicspolitical philosophypolitical philosophy of scienceinductive riskcitizen science
Type
Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Philosophy , Volume 52 , Issue 3: Engaging with Science, Values, and Society , April 2022 , pp. 246 - 255
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Canadian Journal of Philosophy

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

Betz, Gregor. 2013. “In Defence of the Value-Free Ideal.” European Journal for Philosophy of Science 3: 207–20.Google Scholar
de Melo-Martín, Immaculada, and Intemann, Kristen. 2018. The Fight against Doubt: How to Bridge the Gap between Scientists and the Public. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Douglas, Heather. 2005. “Inserting the Public into Science.” In Democratization of Expertise? Exploring Novel Forms of Scientific Advice in Political Decision-Making, edited by Maasen, and Weingart, , 153–69. Dordrecht, Nether.: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Douglas, Heather. 2009. Science, Policy, and the Value-Free Ideal. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dupré, John. 1999. “Are Whales Fish?” In Folkbiology, edited by Medin, and Atran, , 461–76. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Dworkin, Ronald. 1981. “What Is Equality? Part 2: Equality of Resources.” Philosophy and Public Affairs 10: 283–345.Google Scholar
Elliott, Kevin. 2006. “An Ethics of Expertise Based on Informed Consent.” Science and Engineering Ethics 12: 637–61.Google ScholarPubMed
Elliott, , , Kevin, ed. 2008. “Hormesis and Ethics,” BELLE Newsletter 14(3).Google Scholar
Elliott, Kevin. 2011. Is a Little Pollution Good for You? Incorporating Societal Values in Environmental Research. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Elliott, Kevin. 2017. A Tapestry of Values: An Introduction to Values in Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Goodin, Robert. 1995. Utilitarianism as a Public Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hausman, Daniel M. 2015. Valuing Health: Well-Being, Freedom, and Suffering. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hoffman, George, and Stempsey, William. 2008. “The Hormesis Concept and Risk Assessment: Are There Unique Ethical and Political Considerations?” BELLE Newsletter 14 (3): 11–17.Google Scholar
Intemann, Kristen. 2015. “Distinguishing between Legitimate and Illegitimate Values in Climate Modeling.” European Journal for Philosophy of Science 5: 217–32.Google Scholar
Jasanoff, Sheila. 1990. The Fifth Branch. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel. (1785) 1998. Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, edited by Gregor, Mary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kitcher, Philip. 2011. Science in a Democratic Society. Amherst, NY: Prometheus.Google Scholar
Pielke, Roger Jr.. 2007. The Honest Broker. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rawls, John. 1993. Political Liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Rawls, John. 1999. A Theory of Justice. Revised edition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reiss, Julian. 2017. “Fact-Value Entanglement in Positive Economics.” Journal of Economic Methodology 24: 134–49.Google Scholar
Renn, Ortwin. 2008. “An Ethical Appraisal of Hormesis: Towards a Rational Discourse on the Acceptability of Risks and Benefits.” BELLE Newsletter 14 (3): 22–35.Google Scholar
Ripstein, Arthur. 2009. Force and Freedom: Kant’s Legal and Political Philosophy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schroeder, S. Andrew. 2017a. “Using Democratic Values in Science: An Objection and (Partial) Response.” Philosophy of Science 84: 1044–54.Google Scholar
Schroeder, S. Andrew. 2017b. “Value Choices in Summary Measures of Population Health.” Public Health Ethics 10: 176–87.Google Scholar
Schroeder, S. Andrew. 2019. “Democratic Values: A Better Foundation for Public Trust in Science.” British Journal for Philosophy of Science. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjps/axz023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shrader-Frechette, Kristin. 1994. Ethics of Scientific Research. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
Shrader-Frechette, Kristin. 2008. “Ideological Toxicology: Invalid Logic, Science, Ethics about Low-Dose Pollution.” BELLE Newsletter 14 (3): 39–47.Google Scholar
Sobel, David. 2012. “Backing Away from Libertarian Self-Ownership.” Ethics 123: 32–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilholt, Torsten. 2016. “Collaborative Research, Scientific Communities, and the Social Diffusion of Trustworthiness.” In The Epistemic Life of Groups: Essays in the Epistemology of Collectives, edited by Brady, Michael and Fricker, Miranda. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Woodard, Christopher. 2019. Taking Utilitarianism Seriously. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar