1st Edition

Current Controversies in Values and Science

Edited By Kevin C. Elliott, Daniel Steel Copyright 2017
    196 Pages
    by Routledge

    196 Pages
    by Routledge

    Current Controversies in Values and Science asks ten philosophers to debate five questions (two philosophers per debate) that are driving contemporary work in this important area of philosophy of science. The book is perfect for the advanced student, building up her knowledge of the foundations of the field while also engaging its most cutting-edge questions. Introductions and annotated bibliographies for each debate, preliminary descriptions of each chapter, study questions, and a supplemental guide to further controversies involving values in science help provide clearer and richer snapshots of active controversies for all readers.


    List of Contributors

    Introduction: Values and Science: Current Controversies

    Kevin C. Elliott and Daniel Steel

    Part I - Epistemic Values: Can We Distinguish Epistemic from Non-Epistemic Values?

    1 Distinguishing Between Cognitive and Social Values

    Hugh Lacey

    2 The Borderlands Between Epistemic and Non-Epistemic Values

    Phyllis Rooney

    Part II - Epistemic Priority: Must Science Be Committed to Prioritizing Epistemic over Non-Epistemic Values?

    3 Qualified Epistemic Priority: Comparing Two Approaches to Values in Science

    Daniel Steel

    4 Values in Science: Against Epistemic Priority

    Matthew J. Brown


    Part III - Inductive Risk: Does the Argument from Inductive Risk Justify Incorporating Non-Epistemic Values in Scientific Reasoning?

    5 Why Inductive Risk Requires Values in Science

    Heather Douglas

    6 Why the Argument from Inductive Risk Doesn’t Justify Incorporating Non-Epistemic Values in Scientific Reasoning

    Gregor Betz

    Part IV - Diversity: Can Social Diversity Be Best Incorporated into Science by Adopting the Social Value Management Ideal?

    7 Can Social Diversity Be Best Incorporated into Science by Adopting the Social Value Management Ideal?

    Kristina Rolin

    8 Feminism, Values, and the Bias Paradox: Why Value Management Is Not Sufficient

    Kristen Intemann

    Part V - Democracy: To Ensure That Scientific Institutions Serve Values of Social Justice and Democracy, Should Biomedical Research Be Socialized?

    9 Socializing Medical Research

    James Robert Brown

    10 Meanwhile, Why Not Biomedical Capitalism?

    Julian Reiss

    Suggestions for Further Reading

    Supplemental Guide to Further Controversies



    Kevin C. Elliott is Associate Professor in Lyman Briggs College, the Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, and the Department of Philosophy at Michigan State University. He is the author of Is a Little Pollution Good for You? Incorporating Societal Values in Environmental Research (2011) and A Tapestry of Values: An Introduction to Values in Science (2017), as well as a wide variety of journal articles and book chapters addressing issues in the philosophy of science and practical ethics.

    Daniel Steel is Associate Professor at the W. Maurice Young Centre for Applied Ethics at the University of British Columbia. His research focuses on coupled ethical-epistemic issues in science, especially in relation to environmental and public health issues. He is the author of Philosophy and the Precautionary Principle: Science, Evidence, and  Environmental Policy (2015) and Across the Boundaries: Extrapolation in Biology and Social Science (2008), as well as numerous articles in leading journals in the philosophy of science.

     The ten specially-commissioned articles in this volume capture the excitement and challenges of one of the hottest areas of contemporary philosophy of science. Written for the advanced student of philosophy, these essays will equally engage the interest of the seasoned professional. 

    --Janet Kourany, University of Notre Dame

    “Current Controversies in Values and Science” is an outstandingly helpful summary of the recent debates on how science and values are entangled. With its short chapters, students might feel lighted to approach these complex matters and form their own opinion about what is at stake in public debates and how could philosophy help them to assess the arguments and to see through the positions.

    --Adam Tamas Tuboly, Institute of Philosophy, Hungarian Academy of Sciences Supported by the MTA BTK Lendület Morals and Science Research Group