Keren, Arnon (2014) Science and Informed, Counterfactual, Democratic Consent. In: UNSPECIFIED.

Preview

PDF keren-science-informed-democratic-consent.pdf - Draft Version Download (76kB)

Abstract

On many science-related policy questions, the public is unable to make informed decisions, because of its inability to make use of knowledge and information obtained by scientists. Philip Kitcher and James Fishkin have both suggested therefore that on certain science-related issues, public policy should not be decided upon by actual democratic vote, but should instead conform to the public's Counterfactual Informed Democratic Decision (CIDD). Indeed, this suggestion underlies Kitcher's specification of an ideal of a well-ordered science. The paper argues that this suggestion misconstrues the normative significance of CIDDs. At most, CIDDs might have epistemic significance, but no authority or legitimizing force.

---

Export/Citation:

EndNote | BibTeX | Dublin Core | ASCII/Text Citation (Chicago) | HTML Citation | OpenURL

Social Networking:

Share |

---

Item Type:	Conference or Workshop Item (UNSPECIFIED)
Creators:	Creators Email ORCID Keren, Arnon akeren@research.haifa.ac.il
Keywords:	Science and Democracy; Well-ordered Science; Consent; Philip Kitcher; James Fishkin
Subjects:	General Issues > Ethical Issues General Issues > Science and Society General Issues > Science and Policy General Issues > Values In Science
Depositing User:	Dr. Arnon Keren
Date Deposited:	05 Sep 2014 12:41
Last Modified:	05 Sep 2014 12:41
Item ID:	11010
Subjects:	General Issues > Ethical Issues General Issues > Science and Society General Issues > Science and Policy General Issues > Values In Science
Date:	6 November 2014
URI:	https://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/id/eprint/11010

Monthly Views for the past 3 years

Monthly Downloads for the past 3 years

Plum Analytics

Actions (login required)

View Item