Elliott, Kevin (2010) Direct and Indirect Roles for Values in Science. [Preprint]

Microsoft Word (Direct and Indirect Roles for Values in Science) Phil_Sci_2011_Preprint.doc - Accepted Version Download (112kB)

Abstract

Although many philosophers have employed the distinction between “direct” and “indirect” roles for values in science, I argue that it merits further clarification. The distinction can be formulated in several ways: as a logical point, as a distinction between epistemic attitudes, or as a clarification of different consequences associated with accepting scientific claims. Moreover, it can serve either as part of a normative ideal or as a tool for policing how values influence science. While various formulations of the distinction may (with further clarification) contribute to a normative ideal, they have limited effectiveness for regulating how values influence science.

---

Export/Citation:

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

Social Networking:

Share |

---

Item Type:	Preprint
Creators:	Creators Email ORCID Elliott, Kevin ke@sc.edu
Keywords:	values; inductive risk; value judgments; science and values; public policy
Subjects:	General Issues > Ethical Issues General Issues > Science and Society General Issues > Science and Policy General Issues > Values In Science
Depositing User:	Kevin Elliott
Date Deposited:	11 Dec 2010 04:30
Last Modified:	11 Dec 2010 04:30
Item ID:	8420
Subjects:	General Issues > Ethical Issues General Issues > Science and Society General Issues > Science and Policy General Issues > Values In Science
Date:	9 December 2010
URI:	https://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/id/eprint/8420

Monthly Views for the past 3 years

Monthly Downloads for the past 3 years

Plum Analytics

Actions (login required)

View Item