Skip to main content
Log in

Philosophy of Science and Ethics

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Axiomathes Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The issue whether science can be correctly submitted to ethical judgment has been widely debated especially in the 1960s. Those who denied the legitimacy of such a judgment stressed that this would entail an undue limitation of the freedom of science; those who defended such a limitation laid stress on the great dangers that an uncontrolled growth of scientific knowledge has already produced and would continue to produce against humankind. This sterile debate can be settled by recognizing that scientific knowledge can and must be evaluated, as far as its validity is concerned, exclusively through the methodological criteria admitted by the professionals of the single scientific disciplines concerned, and no ethical judgment is pertinent from this point of view. Nevertheless, if we consider science as a particular system of social activities, entailing concrete procedures, conditions and applications, the ethical evaluation of these actions is pertinent and correct. A second question is whether or not the inclusion of these ethical investigations in the specific domain of philosophy of science is correct. If one conceives philosophy of science simply as an epistemology of science consisting in a logical-methodological investigation about the language of scientific theories, this broadening would appear spurious. This view, however, is too narrow and dated: a fully fledged philosophical investigation on the complex phenomenon of science cannot prevent important outlooks and instruments of the philosophical inqujiry (in particular ethics) from legitimately pertaining to the philosophy of science.

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

Notes

  1. See Hanson (1958), Kuhn (1962), Feyerabend (1975) and Toulmin (1958).

  2. See Bernal (1939), Bloor (1976), Knorr-Cetina (1981) and Latour and Woolgar (1979).

  3. A detailed elaboration of this approach is offered in chapter 9 of Agazzi (2014).

References

  • Agazzi E (2004) Righy, wrong and science: the ethical dimensions of the techno-scientific enterprise. Rodopi, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Agazzi E (2014) Scientific objectivity and its contexts. Springer, Cham

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bernal J (1939) The social function of science. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloor D (1976) Knowledge and social imagery. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Feyerabend P (1975) Against method. New Left Books, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanson NR (1958) Patterns of discovery. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Knorr-Cetina KD (1981) The manufacture of knowledge: an essay on the constructivist and contextual nature of science. Pergamon Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn T (1962) The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago University Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour B, Woolgar S (1979) Laboratory life: the social construction of scientific facts. Sage, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Toulmin S (1958) The uses of arguments. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Evandro Agazzi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Agazzi, E. Philosophy of Science and Ethics. Axiomathes 28, 587–602 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10516-018-9408-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10516-018-9408-0

Keywords

Navigation