Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Engagement for progress: applied philosophy of science in context

  • Published:
Synthese Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Philosophy of science was once a much more socially engaged endeavor, and can be so again. After a look back at philosophy of science in the 1930s–1950s, I turn to discuss the current potential for returning to a more engaged philosophy of science. Although philosophers of science have much to offer scientists and the public, I am skeptical that much can be gained by philosophers importing off-the-shelf discussions from philosophy of science to science and society. Such efforts will likely look like efforts to do applied ethics by merely applying ethical theories to particular contexts and problems. While some insight can be gained by these kinds of endeavors, the most interesting and pressing problems for the actual practitioners and users of science are rarely addressed. Instead, I recommend that philosophers of science engage seriously and regularly with scientists and/or the users of science in order to gain an understanding of the conceptual issues on the ground. From such engagement, flaws in the traditional philosophical frameworks, and how such flaws can be remedied, become apparent. Serious engagement with the contexts of science thus provides the most fruit for philosophy of science per se and for the practitioners whom the philosophers aim to assist. And if one focuses on contexts where science has its most social relevance, these efforts can help to provide the thing that philosophy of science now lacks: a full-bodied philosophy of science in society.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Beauchamp T., Childress J. (2009) Principles of biomedical ethics. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Bluhm R. (2005) From hierarchy to network: A richer view of evidence for evidence-based medicine. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 48: 535–547

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bush V. (1960) Science: The endless frontier. National Science Foundation, Washington D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butts C. F. (1948) Science and social responsibility. Philosophy of Science 15: 100–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cartwright N., Cat J., Fleck L., Uebel T. (1996) Otto Neurath: Philosophy between science and politics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Douglas, H. (1998). The use of science in policy-making: A study of values in dioxin science. (Dissertation, University of Pittsburgh).

  • Douglas H. (2000) Inductive risk and values in science. Philosophy of Science 67: 559–579

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Douglas H. (2003) Moral responsibilities of scientists: Tensions between autonomy and responsibility. American Philosophical Quarterly 40: 59–68

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas H. (2005) Inserting the public into science. In: Maasen S., Weingart P. (eds) Democratization of expertise? Exploring novel forms of scientific advice in political decision-making, sociology of the sciences. Springer, Berlin, pp 153–169

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas H. (2007) Rejecting the ideal of value-free science. In: Kincaid H., Dupré J., Wylie A. (eds) Value-free science? Ideals and illusions. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 120–139

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Douglas H. (2008) The role of values in expert reasoning. Public Affairs Quarterly 22: 1–18

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas H. (2009a) Science, policy, and the value-free ideal. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas H. (2009b) Reintroducing prediction to explanation. Philosophy of Science 76: 444–463

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edgar S. (2009) Logical empiricism, politics, and professionalism. Science and Education 18: 177–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elliott K. (2006) An ethics of expertise based on informed consent. Science and Engineering Ethics 12: 637–661

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elliott K. (2008) A case for deliberation in response to hormesis research. Human and Experimental Toxicology 27: 529–538

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feigl H. (1956) Some major issues and developments in the philosophy of science of logical empiricism. In: Feigl H., Scriven M. (eds) Foundations of science and the concepts of psychology and psychoanalysis, Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis

    Google Scholar 

  • Feigl H., Brodbeck M. (1953) Readings in the philosophy of science. Appleton-Century-Crofts Inc, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Frank J. (1949) The place of the expert in a democratic society. Philosophy of Science 16: 3–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman M. (1974) Explanation and scientific understanding. Journal of Philosophy 71: 5–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman M. (1996) Overcoming metaphysics: Carnap and Heidegger. In: Giere R., Feigl H. (eds) Origins of logical empiricism, Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, pp 45–79

    Google Scholar 

  • Frodeman, R., & C. Mitcham, (Eds.) (2004). Toward a Philosophy of Science Policy: Approaches and Issues. Special Issue of Philosophy Today, 48, 5.

  • Gottshalk D. W. (1952) Value science. Philosophy of Science 19: 183–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg D. S. (1999) The politics of pure science. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg D. S. (2001) Science, money, and politics: Political triumph and ethical erosion. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg D. S. (2007) Science for sale: The perils, rewards, and delusions of campus capitalism. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Guston D. (2000) Between politics and science: Assuring the integrity and productivity of research. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Guston, D. (2004). Forget politicizing science. Let’s democratize science! Issues in Science and Technology (Fall Issue), 25–28.

  • Hanson N. R. (1959) On the symmetry between explanation and prediction. Philosophical Review 68: 349–358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartman R. S. (1950) Is a science of ethics possible?. Philosophy of Science 17: 238–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartman R. S. (1958) Value, fact, and science. Philosophy of Science 25: 97–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartung F. E. (1947) Sociological foundations of modern science. Philosophy of Science 14: 68–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartung F. E. (1951) Science as an institution. Philosophy of Science 18: 35–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartung F. E. (1952) Problems of the sociology of knowledge. Philosophy of Science 19: 17–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haworth L., Minas J. S. (1954) Concerning value science. Philosophy of Science 21: 54–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hempel, C. G. (1965). Science and human values. In Aspects of scientific explanation and other essays in the philosophy of science (pp. 81–96). New York: The Free Press.

  • Hempel C. G., Oppenheim P. (1948) Studies in the logic of explanation. Philosophy of Science 15: 135–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hinshaw V. G. (1948) Epistemological relativism and the sociology of knowledge. Philosophy of Science 15: 4–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard D. (2003) Two left turns make a right: On the curious political career of North American philosophy of science at mid-century. In: Richardson A., Hardcastle G. (eds) Logical empiricism in North America, Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, pp 25–93

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard D. (2009) Better red than dead—Putting an end to the social irrelevance of postwar philosophy of science. Science and Education 18: 199–220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kevles D. (1995) The physicists. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, CA

    Google Scholar 

  • Kitcher P. (1976) Explanation, conjunction, and unification. Journal of Philosophy 73: 207–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kitcher P. (1989) Explanatory unification and the causal structure of the world. In: Salmon W., Kitcher P. (eds) Scientific explanation, Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, pp 410–505

    Google Scholar 

  • Kitcher P. (2001) Science, truth, and democracy. Oxford University Press, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Krimsky S. (2003) Science in the private interest: Has the lure of profits corrupted biomedical research?. Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham, MD

    Google Scholar 

  • Krimsky S. (2005) The weight of scientific evidence in policy and law. American Journal of Public Health 95: S129–S136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. (1977). Objectivity, value, and theory choice. In The essential tension, (pp. 320–339). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  • Lacey H. (1999) Is science value-free? Values and scientific understanding. Routledge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Laudan L. (2004) The epistemic, the cognitive, and the social. In: Machamer P., Wolters G. (eds) Science, values, and objectivity. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, pp 14–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Levi I. (1960) Must the scientist make value judgments?. Journal of Philosophy 57: 345–357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levi I. (1962) On the seriousness of mistakes. Philosophy of Science 29: 47–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linkov I., Looney D., Cormier S., Satterstrom F. K., Bridges T. (2009) Weight-of-evidence evaluation in environmental assessment: Review of qualitative and quantitative approaches. Science of the Total Environment 407: 5199–5205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lipton P. (2004) Inference to the best explanation (2nd ed.). Routledge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Littauer S. B. (1954) Social aspects of scientific method in industrial production. Philosophy of Science 21: 93–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Longino H. E. (2002) The fate of knowledge. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Malisoff W. H. (1944) Editorial: Philosophy of Science after ten years. Philosophy of Science 11: 1–2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McMullin E. (1983) Values in science. In: Asquith P. D., Nickles T. (eds) Proceedings of the 1982 biennial meeting of the philosophy of science association. Philosophy of Science Association, East Lansing, pp 3–28

    Google Scholar 

  • Merton R. K. (1938) Science and the social order. Philosophy of Science 5: 321–327

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merton R. K. (1949) The role of applied social science in the formation of policy. Philosophy of Science 16: 161–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell S. (2004) The prescribed and proscribed values in science policy. In: Machamer P., Wolters G. (eds) Science, values, and objectivity. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, pp 245–255

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagel E. (1961) The structure of science: Problems in the logic of scientific explanation. Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Pielke R. (2007) The honest broker: Making sense of science in policy and politics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Reisch G. (2005) How the cold war transformed philosophy of science: To the icy slopes of logic. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Reisch G. (2009) Three kinds of political engagement for philosophy of science. Science and Education 18: 191–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rescher N. (1958) On explanation and prediction. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 8: 281–290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rescher N. (1963) Discrete state systems, Markov chains, and problems in the theory of scientific explanation and prediction. Philosophy of Science 30: 325–345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson A. W. (2002) Engineering philosophy of science: American pragmatism and logical empiricism in the 1930s. Philosophy of Science 69: S36–S47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rudner R. (1953) The scientist qua scientist makes value judgments. Philosophy of Science 20: 1–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salmon W. (1989) Four decades of scientific explanation. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarewitz D. (1996) Frontiers of illusion: Science, technology, and the politics of progress. Temple University Press, Philadelphia, PA

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheffler I. (1957) Explanation, prediction, and abstraction. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 7: 293–309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scriven M. (1959) Explanation and prediction in evolutionary theory. Science 130: 477–482

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shapin S. (2008) The scientific life. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepard H. (1956) Basic research and the social system of pure science. Philosophy of Science 23: 48–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shrader-Frechette K. (1991) Risk and rationality. University of California Press, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  • Shrader-Frechette K. (1993) Burying uncertainty: Risk and the case against geological disposal of nuclear waste. University of California Press, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  • Shrader-Frechette K. (1994) Ethics of scientific research. Rowan and Littlefield, Lanham, MD

    Google Scholar 

  • Simpson G. (1951) Science as morality. Philosophy of Science 18: 132–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith B. L. R. (1990) American science policy since world war II. Brookings Institution, Washington D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sober E. (1986) Philosophical problems for environmentalism. In: Norton B. (eds) The preservation of species. Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp 173–194

    Google Scholar 

  • Solomon M. (2001) Social empiricism. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Suppes P. (1954) Some remarks on problems and methods in the philosophy of science. Philosophy of Science 21: 242–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uebel T. (2009) Knowing who your friends are: Aspects of the politics of logical empiricism. Science and Education 18: 161–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weed D. (2005) Weight of evidence: A review of concept and methods. Risk Analysis 25: 1545–1557

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Philosophy, University of Tennessee, 801 McClung Tower, Knoxville, TN, 37996-0480, USA

    Heather Douglas

Authors
  1. Heather Douglas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Heather Douglas.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Douglas, H. Engagement for progress: applied philosophy of science in context. Synthese 177, 317–335 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-010-9787-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-010-9787-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation