David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Environmental Philosophy 2 (1):5-13 (2005)
The relationship between philosophy and the community has become relevant again. It has been the government itself, in the form of public science agencies, which has turned to philosophy and the humanities for help, rather than vice versa. Since 1990, US federal science agencies * agencies such as the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation * have steadily increased their support of social science and humanities research. This support is all the more striking in that it has happened at a time when federal support for direct humanities research, through the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities, has declined. The times demand a corollary to the field of science policy. Just as science policy seeks to offer a systematic evaluation of how science contribute to decision making, humanities policy can methodically investigate how the humanities can better contribute to policy making and how it can help science and technology take better account of societal values
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Robert Frodeman (2013). Philosophy Dedisciplined. Synthese 190 (11):1917-1936.
Similar books and articles
Sybil Francis (1999). Developing a Federal Policy on Research Misconduct. Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (2):261-272.
Barry Bozeman & Daniel Sarewitz (2011). Public Value Mapping and Science Policy Evaluation. Minerva 49 (1):1-23.
Robert Frodeman & Adam Briggle (2012). The Dedisciplining of Peer Review. Minerva 50 (1):3-19.
Mette Ebbesen (2008). The Role of the Humanities and Social Sciences in Nanotechnology Research and Development. NanoEthics 2 (3):333-333.
Erik Fisher (2011). Editorial Overview. Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (4):607-620.
David E. Hayes-Bautista (1992). The Intellectual Basis for Latino AIDS Policy: Towards the Humanities and Health Policy. [REVIEW] Journal of Medical Humanities 13 (4):235-246.
Heather Douglas (2005). Boundaries Between Science and Policy. Environmental Philosophy 2 (1):14-29.
Juan Urrutia Elejalde (2008). Puzzles and Problems. Poznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities 96 (1):49-70.
Stephen F. Haller & James Gerrie (2007). The Role of Science in Public Policy: Higher Reason, or Reason for Hire? [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 20 (2):139-165.
Jonathan D. Moreno (2011). The Body Politic: The Battle Over Science in America. Bellevue Literary Press.
A. Koj & Piotr Sztompka (eds.) (2001). Images of the World: Science, Humanities, Art. Jagiellonian University.
Edward G. Slingerland (2008). What Science Offers the Humanities: Integrating Body and Culture. Cambridge University Press.
Robert Frodeman (2006). The Policy Turn in Environmental Ethics. Environmental Ethics 28 (1):3-20.
Added to index2011-01-09
Total downloads4 ( #254,577 of 1,101,078 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #290,337 of 1,101,078 )
How can I increase my downloads?