Keren, Arnon (2014) Science and Informed, Counterfactual, Democratic Consent. In: UNSPECIFIED.
|
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: |
Item Type: | Conference or Workshop Item (UNSPECIFIED) | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Creators: |
|
||||||
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 |