Skip to main content
Log in

Scientific and lay communities: earning epistemic trust through knowledge sharing

  • Published:
Synthese Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Feminist philosophers of science have been prominent amongst social epistemologists who draw attention to communal aspects of knowing. As part of this work, I focus on the need to examine the relations between scientific communities and lay communities, particularly marginalized communities, for understanding the epistemic merit of scientific practices. I draw on Naomi Scheman’s argument (2001) that science earns epistemic merit by rationally grounding trust across social locations. Following this view, more turns out to be relevant to epistemic assessment than simply following the standards of “normal science”. On such an account, philosophers of science need to attend to the relations between scientific communities and various lay communities, especially marginalized communities, to understand how scientific practices can rationally ground trust and thus earn their status as “good ways of knowing”. Trust turns out to involve a wide set of expectations on behalf of lay communities. In this paper I focus on expectations of knowledge sharing, using examples of “knowledge-sharing whistleblowers” to illustrate how failures in knowledge sharing with lay communities can erode epistemic trust in scientific communities, particularly in the case of marginalized communities.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson E. (1995) Knowledge, human interests, and objectivity in feminist epistemology. Philosophical Topics 23(2): 27–58

    Google Scholar 

  • Angell M. (2004) The truth about drug companies: How they deceive us and what to do about it. Random House, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Baier A. (1986) Trust and antitrust. Ethics 96(2): 231–260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bok S. (1981) Blowing the whistle. In: Fleishman J. L., Liebman L., Moore M. (eds) Public duties: The moral obligations of government officials. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, pp 204–220

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell R. (1998) Illusions of paradox. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Boulder

    Google Scholar 

  • Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. (2009, January 15). ‘We all have a vested interest’ in polar bear future: Prentice to summit. Retrieved January 17, 2009, from http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2009/01/16/pbear-summit.html

  • Code L. (1991) What can she know? Feminist theory and construction of knowledge. Cornell University Press, Ithaca

    Google Scholar 

  • Code L. (2006) Ecological thinking: The politics of epistemic location. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Crease, R. (2004). The paradox of trust in science. Physics World, March, 18.

  • Dupré J. (2001) Human nature and the limits of science. Clarendon Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Epstein S. (2007) Inclusion: The politics of difference in medical research. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Grasswick, H. E. (forthcoming). Liberatory epistemology and sharing knowledge: Querying the norms. In H. E. Grasswick (Ed.), Feminist epistemology and philosophy of science: Power in knowledge Dordrecht: Springer.

  • Harding S. (1991) Whose science? Whose knowledge? Thinking from women’s lives. Cornell University Press, Ithaca

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardwig J. (1985) Epistemic dependence. Journal of Philosophy 82: 335–349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hardwig J. (1991) The role of trust in knowledge. Journal of Philosophy 88(12): 693–708

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson R. A. (2003) Whistleblowing: When it works—and why. Lynne Rienner Publishers, Boulder

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones K. (2002) The politics of credibility. In: Antony L., Witt C. (eds) A mind of one’s own: Feminist essays on reason and objectivity, 2nd ed. Westview, Boulder, pp 154–176

    Google Scholar 

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

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Longino H. E. (1990) Science as social knowledge: Values and objectivity in scientific inquiry. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • McKnight D. M. (1998) Scientific societies and whistleblowers: The relationship between the community and the individual. Science and Engineering Ethics 4: 97–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson L. H. (1990) Who knows: From Quine to a feminist empiricism. Temple University Press, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson L. H. (1993) Epistemological communities. In: Alcoff L., Potter E. (eds) Feminist epistemologies. Routledge, New York, pp 121–159

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunavut Wildlife Management Board: (2000) Final report of the Inuit bowhead knowledge study, Nunavut, Canada. Nunavut Wildlife Management Board, Iqaluit

    Google Scholar 

  • Resnik D. B. (2006) Openness versus secrecy in scientific research. Episteme 2(3): 135–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Resnik D. B. (2007) The price of truth. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Scheman N. (2001) Epistemology resuscitated. In: Tuana N., Morgen S. (eds) Engendering rationalities. State University of New York Press, Albany, pp 23–52

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuchman M. (2005) The drug trial: Nancy Olivieri and the scandal that rocked the hospital for sick children. Random House Canada, Toronto

    Google Scholar 

  • Shavers V., Lynch C. F., Burmeister L. F. (2002) Racial differences in factors that influence the willingness to participate in medical research studies. Annals of Epidemiology 12(4): 248–256

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Townley C. (2003) Trust and the curse of Cassandra. Philosophy in the contemporary world 10(2): 105–111

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Heidi E. Grasswick.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Grasswick, H.E. Scientific and lay communities: earning epistemic trust through knowledge sharing. Synthese 177, 387–409 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-010-9789-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-010-9789-0

Keywords

Navigation