Leading with ethics, aiming for policy: new opportunities for philosophy of science

Abstract

The goal of this paper is to articulate and advocate for an enhanced role for philosophers of science in the domain of science policy as well as within the science curriculum. I argue that philosophy of science as a field can learn from the successes as well as the mistakes of bioethics and begin to develop a new model that includes robust contributions to the science classroom, research collaborations with scientists, and a role for public philosophy through involvement in science policy development. Through an analysis of two case studies, I illustrate how philosophers of science can make effective and productive contributions to science education as well as to interdisciplinary scientific research, and argue for the essential role of philosophers of science in the realm of science policy.

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

References

  1. Adger W. N. (2004) The right to keep cold. Environment and Planning 36: 1711–1715

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Alcamo, J., Shaw, R., Hordijk, L. (eds) (1990) The RAINS model of acidification: Science and strategies in Europe. Kluwer, Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

  3. Benatar S., Fleischer T. (2006) Bioethics with blinders. Hastings Center Report 36(6): 4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bernstein, L., Bosch, P., Canziani, O., Chen, Z., Christ, R., Davidson, O., et al. (Eds.). (2008). IPCC, 2007: Climate change 2007: Synthesis report. Contribution of working groups I, II and III to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Geneva, Switzerland: IPCC.

  5. Broecker W. S. (1991) The great ocean conveyor. Oceanography 4: 79–89

    Google Scholar 

  6. Broome J. (1991) Weighing goods: Equality, uncertainty and time. Blackwell, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  7. Broome J. (1992) Counting the cost of global warming. White Horse Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  8. Broome J. (1999) Ethics out of economics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA

    Google Scholar 

  9. Broome J. (2004) Weighing lives. Oxford University Press, Oxford; New York

    Google Scholar 

  10. Caney S. (2006) Global justice, rights, and climate change. Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence 18(2): 255–278

    Google Scholar 

  11. Cass D. (1965) Optimum growth in an aggregative model of capital accumulation. Review of Economic Studies 32(3): 233–240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Cranor C. F. (1993) Regulating toxic substances: A philosophy of science and the law. Oxford University Press, Oxford; New York

    Google Scholar 

  13. Daniels N. (2006) Equity and population health: Toward a broader bioethics agenda. Hastings Center Report 36(4): 22–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Ehrlich P.R. (2003) Bioethics: Are our priorities right?. Bioscience 53(12): 1207–1216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Farmer P. (2004) Pathologies of power: Health, human rights, and the new war on the poor. University of California Press, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  16. Farmer P., Campos N. G. (2004) Rethinking medical ethics: A view from below. Developing World Bioethics 4(1): 17–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Fletcher J. C. (1995) Clinical bioethics at the NIH: History and a new vision. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 5(4): 355–364

    Google Scholar 

  18. Fuller S. (1993) Philosophy of science and its discontents. Guilford Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  19. Gardiner S. M. (2006) A perfect moral storm: Climate change, intergenerational ethics and the problem of moral corruption. Environmental Values 15(3): 397–413

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Goes, M., Keller, K., & Tuana, N. (forthcoming). The economics (or lack thereof) of aerosol geoengineering. Climatic Change.

  21. IPCC. (2007). Summary for policymakers. In: S. Solomon, D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, et al. (Eds.), Climate change 2007: The physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press.

  22. Knorr Cetina K. D. (1999) Epistemic cultures. How the sciences make knowledge. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  23. Koopmans T. C. (1965) On the concept of optimal economic growth. Academiae Scientiarum Scripta Varia 28(1): 225–300

    Google Scholar 

  24. Leary N., Conde C., Kulkarni J., Nyong A., Pulhin J. (2008) Climate change and vulnerability. Earthscan Publications, London; Sterling, VA

    Google Scholar 

  25. Louis M. E. S., Hess J. J. (2008) Climate change impacts on and implications for global health. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 35: 527–538

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Lowey E.H., Springer Lowey R. (2005) Use and abuse of bioethics: Integrity and professional standing. Health Care Analysis 13(1): 73–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Mastrandrea M. D., Schneider S. H. (2004) Probabilistic integrated assessment of “dangerous” climate change. Science 304(5670): 571–575

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. McInerney D., Keller K. (2008) Economically optimal risk reduction strategies in the face of uncertain climate thresholds. Climatic Change 91(1–2): 29–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Meehl G. A. et al (2007) Global Climate Projections. In: Solomon S., Qin D., Manning M., Chen Z., Marquis M., Averyt K. B., Tignor M., Miller H. L. (eds) Climate change 2007: The physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA

    Google Scholar 

  30. Mervis J. (2001) NSF scores low on using own criteria. Science 291(5513): 2533–2535

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Mitcham C., Frodeman R. (2004) New directions in the philosophy of science: Toward a philosophy of science policy. Philosophy Today 48: 3–15

    Google Scholar 

  32. National Science Foundation. (1997). GPRA Strategic Plan, FY 1997-FY 2003. http://www.nsf.gov/od/gpraplan/gpraplan.htm

  33. National Science Foundation. (2002). Important Notice No. 127, Implementation of new Grant Proposal Guide Requirements Related to the Broader Impacts Criterion.

  34. Nordhaus W. D. (1992) An optimal transition path for controlling greenhouse gases. Science 258(5086): 1315–1319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Nordhaus W.D. (2007) A review of the stern review on the economics of climate change. Journal of Economic Literature 45(3): 686–702

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Paavola J., Adger W. N. (2006) Fair adaptation to climate change. Ecological Economics 56(4): 594–609

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Parks B., Roberts T. (2006) Globalization, vulnerability to climate change, and perceived injustice. Society and National Resources 19(4): 337–355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Ramsey F. (1928) A mathematical theory of saving. Economic Journal 38(152): 543–559

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Sachs W. (2006) Climate change and human rights; Interactions between global change and human health. Scripta Varia 106 Pontifical Academy of Sciences, Vatican City

    Google Scholar 

  40. Sagoff M. (2004) Price, principle, and the environment. Cambridge University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  41. Schienke E.W., Tuana N., Brown D.A., Davis K.J., Keller K., Shortle J.S. et al (2009) The role of the NSF Broader Impacts Criterion in enhancing research ethics pedagogy. Social Epistemology 23(3–4): 317–336

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Schienke, E. W., Baum, S., Tuana, N., Davis, K. J., & Keller, K. (2010). Intrinsic ethics regarding integrated assessment models for climate management. Science and Engineering Ethics doi:10.1007/s11948-010-9209-3.

  43. Schneider S. H. (2001) What is ‘dangerous’ climate change?. Nature 411: 17–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Schneider S. H., Semenov S., Patwardhan A., Burton I., Magadza C. H. D., Oppenheimer M. et al (2007) Assessing key vulnerabilities and the risk from climate change. In: Parry M. L., Canziani O. F., Palutikof J. P., Linden P. J. v. d., Hanson C. E. (eds) Climate change 2007: Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability contribution of working group II to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp 779–810

    Google Scholar 

  45. Sen A. (2000) The discipline of cost-benefit analysis. Journal of Legal Studies 29(2): 931–952

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  47. Shrader-Frechette K. S. (2007) Taking action, saving lives: Our duty to protect the environmental and public health. Oxford University Press, Oxford; New York

    Google Scholar 

  48. Shue H. (2003) Climate. In: Jamison D. (eds) A companion to environmental philosophy. Wiley-Blackwell, New York, pp 449–459

    Google Scholar 

  49. Solomon M. (2007) The social epistemology of NIH Consensus Conferences. In: Kincaid H., McKitrick J. (eds) Establishing medical reality: Methodological and metaphysical issues in philosophy of medicine. Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp 167–177

    Google Scholar 

  50. Stern N. (2007) The economics of climate change: The Stern review. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  51. Traweek S. (1988) Beamtimes and lifetimes: The world of high energy physicists. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  52. United Nations. (1992). United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Article 2. FCCC/INFORMAL/84 GE.05-62220 (E) 200705.

  53. United States Congress. (2007). American Creating Opportunities to Meaningfully Promote Excellence in Technology, Education, and Science Act (America COMPETES Act).

  54. Urban N. M., Keller K. (2009) Complementary observational constraints on climate sensitivity. Geophysical Research Letters 36: L04708

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Vanderheiden S. J. (2008) Atmospheric justice: A political theory of climate change. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  56. Weitzman M. L. (2007) A review of The Stern Review of the Economics of Climate Change. Journal of Economic Literature 43(3): 703–724

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Weitzman M. L. (2009) On modeling and interpreting the economics of catastrophic climate change. Review of Economics and Statistics 91(1): 1–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nancy Tuana.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tuana, N. Leading with ethics, aiming for policy: new opportunities for philosophy of science. Synthese 177, 471–492 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-010-9793-4

Download citation

Keywords

  • Science policy
  • Research ethics
  • Science education
  • Climate change
  • Bioethics