David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
NanoEthics 1 (3):177-184 (2007)
I argue that the title question needs to be taken seriously because there are important questions about how the scientific agenda should be set. Natural answers to the question – declarations of the proper autonomy of science or expressions of faith in market forces – are found inadequate. Instead, I propose a form of democracy with respect to scientific research that will avoid the obvious dangers of a tyranny of ignorance. I conclude with some modest proposals about how the ideal of a democratic science might be implemented and with a response to common objections.
|Keywords||Scientific research Governance Autonomy of science|
|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
Céline Kermisch (2012). Do New Ethical Issues Arise at Each Stage of Nanotechnological Development? NanoEthics 6 (1):29-37.
Kamilla Lein Kjølberg (2009). Representations of Nanotechnology in Norwegian Newspapers — Implications for Public Participation. NanoEthics 3 (1):61-72.
Matthias Fink, Rainer Harms & Isabella Hatak (2012). Nanotechnology and Ethics: The Role of Regulation Versus Self-Commitment in Shaping Researchers' Behavior. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 109 (4):569-581.
Erik Fisher & Michael Lightner (2009). Entering the Social Experiment: A Case for the Informed Consent of Graduate Engineering Students. Social Epistemology 23 (3):283-300.
Stephen H. Cutcliffe, Christine M. Pense & Michael Zvalaren (2012). Framing the Discussion: Nanotechnology and the Social Construction of Technology--What STS Scholars Are Saying. NanoEthics 6 (2):81-99.
Similar books and articles
Denise Russell (1997). Animal Experimentation in Psychology and the Question of Scientific Merit. Ethics and the Environment 2 (1):43 - 52.
Felice J. Levine & Joyce M. Iutcovich (2003). Challenges in Studying the Effects of Scientific Societies on Research Integrity. Science and Engineering Ethics 9 (2):257-268.
Robert Post (2009). Constitutional Restraints on the Regulations of Scientific Speech and Scientific Research. Science and Engineering Ethics 15 (3):431-438.
Gary E. Marchant & Lynda L. Pope (2009). The Problems with Forbidding Science. Science and Engineering Ethics 15 (3):375-394.
Philip Kitcher (2008). Science, Religion, and Democracy. Episteme 5 (1):pp. 5-18.
Matthew J. Brown (2010). Genuine Problems and the Significance of Science. Contemporary Pragmatism 7 (2):131-153.
David B. Resnik (2008). Scientific Autonomy and Public Oversight. Episteme 5 (2):pp. 220-238.
Helen E. Longino (2002). Science and the Common Good: Thoughts on Philip Kitcher's Science, Truth, and Democracy. Philosophy of Science 69 (4):560-568.
Torsten Wilholt (2006). Scientific Autonomy and Planned Research: The Case of Space Science. Poiesis and Praxis 4 (4):253-265.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads45 ( #36,843 of 1,100,913 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #290,699 of 1,100,913 )
How can I increase my downloads?