The Democratic Control of the Scientific Control of Politics
- Matthew J. Brown
- … show all 1 hide
Download Chapter (187 KB)
I discuss two popular but apparently contradictory theses:
The democratic control of science – the aims and activities of science should be subject to public scrutiny via democratic processes of representation and participation.
The scientific control of policy, i.e. technocracy – political processes should be problem-solving pursuits determined by the methods and results of science and technology.
Many arguments can be given for (T1), both epistemic and moral/political; I will focus on an argument based on the role of non-epistemic values in policy-relevant science. I will argue that we must accept (T2) as a result of an appraisal of the nature of contemporary political problems. Technocratic systems, however, are subject to serious moral and political objections; these difficulties are sufficiently mitigated by (T1). I will set out a framework in which (T1) and (T2) can be consistently and compellingly combined.
- Anderson, E. (2007). The epistemology of democracy. Episteme: A Journal of Social Epistemology, 3(1), 8–22. CrossRef
- Bohman, J. (1999). Democracy as inquiry, inquiry as democratic: Pragmatism, social science, and the cognitive division of labor. American Journal of Political Science, 43(2), 590–607. CrossRef
- Brown, M. B. (2009). Science in democracy: Expertise, institutions, and representation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. CrossRef
- Dewey, J. (1903). Studies in logical theory. Chicago. University. The decennial publications (2d ser., Vol. XI). Chicago: The University of Chicago press.
- Dewey, J. (1916 ). Essays in experimental logic. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
- Dewey, J. (1927[1986/2008]). The public and its problems (The later works of John Dewey, Vol. 2). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
- Dewey, J. (1933 [1986/2008]). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. (The later works of John Dewey, Vol. 8). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
- Dewey, J. (1938 [1986/2008]). Logic: The theory of inquiry. (The later works of John Dewey, Vol. 12). Southern Illinois University Press.
- Dewey, J. (1939 [1986/2008]). Freedom and culture. (The later works of John Dewey, Vol. 13). Southern Illinois University Press.
- Douglas, H. (2000). Inductive risk and values in science. Philosophy of Science, 67(4), 559–579. CrossRef
- Douglas, H. (2005). Inserting the public into science. In S. Maasen & P. Weingart (Eds.), Democratization of expertise? Exploring novel forms of scientific advice in political decision-making (Sociology of the sciences yearbook, Vol. 24, pp. 153–169). Dordrecht: Springer.
- Douglas, H. (2009). Science, policy, and the value-free ideal. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
- Feyerabend, P. K. (1975). Against method: Outline of an anarchistic theory of knowledge. London and Atlantic Highlands: New Left Books.
- Feyerabend, P. K. (1978). Science in a free society. London: New Left Books.
- Gore, A. (2009). Our choice: A plan to solve the climate crisis. Emmaus: Rodale.
- Jasanoff, S. (2003). Technologies of humility: Citizen participation in governing science. Minerva, 41(3), 223–244. CrossRef
- Jasanoff, S. (2009). Essential parallel between science and democracy. Seed Magazine. http://seedmagazine.com/content/article/the_essential_parallel_between_science_and_democracy. Accessed 16 June 2012.
- Kitcher, P. (2001). Science, truth, and democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossRef
- Kourany, J. A. (2010). Philosophy of science after feminism. Oxford: Oxford University Press. CrossRef
- Longino, H. E. (1990). Science as social knowledge: Values and objectivity in scientific inquiry. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
- Longino, H. E. (2002). The fate of knowledge. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
- Mitcham, C. (1997). Engineering design research and social responsibility. In K. Shrader-Frechette & L. Westra (Eds.), Technology and values (pp. 261–278). Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
- Stern, P. C., & Fineberg, H. V. (Eds.). (1996). Understanding risk: Informing decisions in a democratic society. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
- Turner, S. (2001). What is the problem with experts? Social Studies of Science, 31(1), 123–149. CrossRef
- The Democratic Control of the Scientific Control of Politics
- Book Title
- EPSA11 Perspectives and Foundational Problems in Philosophy of Science
- Book Part
- Part XII
- pp 479-491
- Print ISBN
- Online ISBN
- Series Title
- The European Philosophy of Science Association Proceedings
- Series Volume
- Springer International Publishing
- Copyright Holder
- Springer International Publishing Switzerland
- Additional Links
- eBook Packages
- Editor Affiliations
- 2. Department of Philosophy and History of Science, Faculty of Sciences, University of Athens
- 3. Inst. History & Foundations of Science, Utrecht University
- Matthew J. Brown (4)
- Author Affiliations
- 4. Center for Values in Medicine, Science, and Technology, The University of Texas at Dallas, 800, W. Campbell Rd, JO 31, Richardson, TX, 75248, USA
To view the rest of this content please follow the download PDF link above.