A new direction for science and values
- 827 Downloads
The controversy over the old ideal of “value-free science” has cooled significantly over the past decade. Many philosophers of science now agree that even ethical and political values may play a substantial role in all aspects of scientific inquiry. Consequently, in the last few years, work in science and values has become more specific: Which values may influence science, and in which ways? Or, how do we distinguish illegitimate from illegitimate kinds of influence? In this paper, I argue that this problem requires philosophers of science to take a new direction. I present two case studies in the influence of values on scientific inquiry: feminist values in archaeology and commercial values in pharmaceutical research. I offer a preliminary assessment of these cases, that the influence of values was legitimate in the feminist case, but not in the pharmaceutical case. I then turn to three major approaches to distinguish legitimate from illegitimate influences of values, including the distinction between epistemic and non-epistemic values and Heather Douglas’ distinction between direct and indirect roles for values. I argue that none of these three approaches gives an adequate analysis of the two cases. In the concluding section, I briefly sketch my own approach, which draws more heavily on ethics than the others, and is more promising as a solution to the current problem. This is the new direction in which I think science and values should move.
KeywordsScience and values Feminism Pharmaceuticals Commercial science Relativism Epistemic values Direct and indirect roles
Thanks to Kevin Elliott, Heather Douglas, Charles Pence, Robert Audi, Amelia Hicks, Kenny Boyce, Aaron Segal, Rachael Brown, Kerry McKenzie, and Keizo Matsurbara for comments on earlier versions.
- Amsterdam, J., & McHenry, L. (2012). The Paroxetine 352 bipolar trial: A study in medical ghostwriting. International Journal of Risk and Safety in Medicine, 24, 221–231. doi: 10.3233/JRS-2012-0571.
- Anderson, E. (2005, 2008). Dewey’s moral philosophy. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Dordrecht: Reidel. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/dewey-moral/.
- Aristotle, (1984). Nicomachean ethics. In J. Barnes (Ed.), The complete works of Aristotle (pp. 1729–1867). Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
- Baird, D. (2004). Thing knowledge: A philosophy of scientific instruments. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
- Barnes, B., & Bloor, D. (1982). Relativism, rationalism and the sociology of knowledge. In M. Hollis & S. Lukes (Eds.), Rationality and relativism (pp. 21–47). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Berenson, A. (2005). Evidence in Vioxx suits shows intervention by Merck officials. New York Times, April 24.Google Scholar
- Biddle, J. (2009). Advocates or unencumbered selves? On the role of mill’s political liberalism in Longino’s sociopragmatism. Philosophy of Science, 76(5), 612–623.Google Scholar
- Brown, M. (2011). Inquiry and evidence: From the experimenter’s regress to evidence-based policy. Unpublished manuscript. Retrieved August 20, 2012. http://utdallas.academia.edu/MatthewBrown/Papers/300331/Inquiry_and_Evidence_From_the_Experimenters_Regress_to_Evidence-Based_Policy
- Brown, M. (2012). John Dewey’s logic of science. HOPOS: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science, 2(2), 258–306.Google Scholar
- Brown, M. (2013a). Review of Philip Kitcher, science in a democratic society. Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews. Retrieved March 12, 2014. http://ndpr.nd.edu/news/29284-science-in-a-democratic-society/.
- Callaway, E. (2010). Questions over ghostwriting in drug industry. Nature News Blog. doi: 10.1038/news.2010.453. Retrieved August 22, 2011, from http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100907/full/news.2010.453.html.
- Dewey, J. (1988). Theory of valuation. In J. A. Boydston (Ed.), John Dewey: The later works, 1925–1953 (Vol. 13: 1938–1939, pp. 189–251). Southern Illinois University Press: Carbondale and Edwardsville.Google Scholar
- Douglas, H. (2009). Science, policy, and the value-free ideal. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
- Douglas, H. (2014). Pure science and the problem of progress. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science. doi: 10.1016/j.shpsa.2014.02.001.
- Feyerabend, P. (1993). Against method (3rd ed.). London and New York: Verso.Google Scholar
- Friedman, M. (2001). Dynamics of reason. Stanford: Center for the Study of Language/Information.Google Scholar
- Hicks, D. (2012). Scientific practices and their social context. Phd thesis, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame.Google Scholar
- Kitcher, P. (2011). Science in a democratic society. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.Google Scholar
- Kuhn, T. (1977). Objectivity, value judgment, and theory choice. The essential tension (pp. 320–339). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Lacey, H. (1999). Is science value free? Values and scientific understanding. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Lacey, H. (2005b). Values and objectivity in science: The current controversy about transgenic crops. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
- Ledford, H. (2013). Virtual reality. Nature, 498, 9–127.Google Scholar
- Longino, H. (1990). Science as social knowledge. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
- MacIntyre, A. (1984). After virtue (2nd ed.). Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
- MacIntyre, A. (2006). Moral relativism, truth, and justification. Selected essays: The task of philosophy (pp. 52–73). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- McKaughan, D. (2007). Toward a Richard vocabulary for epistemic attitudes: Mapping the cognitive landscape. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Notre Dame.Google Scholar
- McMullin, E. (1983). Values in science. In P. Asquith & T. Nickles (Eds.), Proceedings of the 1982 Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association (PSA 1982) (Vol. 2, pp. 3–28). Chicago: Philosophy of Science Association.Google Scholar
- Okruhlik, K. (1994). Gender and the biological sciences. Canadian Journal of Philosophy (Supplement), 20, 21–42.Google Scholar
- Psaty, B., & Kronmal, R. (2008). Reporting mortality findings in trials of Rofecoxib for Alzheimer disease or cognitive impairment: A case study based on documents from Rofecoxib litigation. Journal of the American Medical Association, 299(15), 1813–1817. doi: 10.1001/jama.299.15.1813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Radder, H. (Ed.). (2010). Mertonian values, scientific norms, and the commodification of academic research, Chap. 10. In The commodification of academic research. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
- Resnik, D. (2010). Financial interests and the norms of academic science, Chap. 4. In Radder (Ed.).Google Scholar
- Rooney, P. (1992). On values in science: Is the epistemic/non-epistemic distinction useful. In D. Hull, M. Forbes, & K. Okruhlik (Eds.) Proceedings of the 1992 Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association (PSA 1992) (Vol. 2, pp. 13–22). Chicago: Philosophy of Science Association.Google Scholar
- Rorty, R. (1991). The priority of democracy to philosophy. Objectivity, relativism and truth (pp. 175–195). Cambridge, UK and New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Ross, J., Hill, K., Egilman, D., & Krumholz, H. (2008). Guest authorship and ghostwriting in publications related to Rofecoxib: A case study of industry documents from Rofecoxib litigation. Journal of the American Medical Association, 299(15), 1800–1812. doi: 10.1001/jama.299.15.1800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Schiebinger, L. (1999). Has feminism changed science?. Cambridge, MA and London: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Sung, S. C., Wisniewski, S. R., Balasubramani, G. K., Zisook, S., Kurian, B., Warden, D., et al. (2013). Does early-onset chronic or recurrent major depression impact outcomes with antidepressant medications? A CO-MED trial report. Psychological Medicine, 43(5), 945–960. doi: 10.1017/S0033291712001742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Tuana, N. (2012). Embedding philosophers in the practices of science: Bringing humanities to the sciences. Synthese. doi: 10.1007/s11229-012-0171-2.
- van den Belt, H. (2010). Robert Merton, intellectual property, and open science, Chap. 9. In Radder (Ed.).Google Scholar
- Wylie, A. (2001). Doing social science as a feminist: The engendering of archeology. In A. Creager, E. Lunbeck, & L. Schiebinger (Eds.), Feminism in twentieth-century science, technology, and medicine. Women in culture and society (pp. 23–45). Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Wylie, A. (2002). Thinking from things: Essays in the philosophy of archaeology. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
- Wylie, A., & Nelson, L. H. (2007). Chap. 3. In H. Kindcaid, J. Dupré, & A. Wylie (Eds.), Coming to terms with the values of science: Insights from feminist science studies scholarship. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar