David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Behavior and Philosophy 31:209 - 223 (2003)
I distinguish three matters about which decisions have to be made in scientific activities: (1) adoption of strategy; (2) acceptance of data, hypotheses, and theories; and (3) application of scientific knowledge. I argue that, contrary to the common view that only concerning (3) do values have a legitimate role, value judgments often play indispensable roles in connection with decisions concerning (1)—that certain values may not only be furthered by applications of the scientific knowledge gained under a strategy, but they may also provide a primary reason for conducting research under the strategy. However, this is compatible with making decisions concerning (2) that in no way draw upon values. While, in my opinion, this account applies to all the sciences, it has special salience in the behavioral and cognitive sciences. The behavioral scientist, qua scientist, makes value judgments when making decisions about which strategy to adopt, but not when deciding which theories to accept as providing knowledge and understanding of specified domains of phenomena.
|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
Anna Alexandrova (forthcoming). Can the Science of Well-Being Be Objective? British Journal for the Philosophy of Science:axw027.
Hugh Lacey & Pablo R. Mariconda (2012). The Eagle and the Starlings: Galileo's Argument for the Autonomy of Science—How Pertinent is It Today? Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 43 (1):122-131.
Similar books and articles
Richard Rudner (1953). The Scientist Qua Scientist Makes Value Judgments. Philosophy of Science 20 (1):1-6.
Katie Steele (2012). The Scientist Qua Policy Advisor Makes Value Judgments. Philosophy of Science 79 (5):893-904.
Marcus Vinícius C. Baldo & Anouk Barberousse (2010). Person as Moralist and Scientist. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33 (4):331.
Peter Menzies (2010). Norms, Causes, and Alternative Possibilities. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33 (14):346-347.
Alan Fogel, Ilse de Koeyer, Cory Secrist & Ryan Nagy (2002). Dynamic Systems Theory Places the Scientist in the System. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (5):623-624.
Martha Mackay (2009). Why Nursing has Not Embraced the Clinician–Scientist Role. Nursing Philosophy 10 (4):287-296.
Nicholas Humphrey (2010). Person as Moral Scientist. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33 (04):340.
Eleonora Montuschi (1996). Metaphor in Social Science. Theoria 11 (1):49-61.
Abdullah Kaygi (2006). Value-Judgements and Values. The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 9:97-102.
James C. Gaa (1977). Moral Autonomy and the Rationality of Science. Philosophy of Science 44 (4):513-541.
Steve Clarke (2007). Against the Unification of the Behavioral Sciences. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 30 (1):21-22.
Julie Zahle (2012). Practical Knowledge and Participant Observation. Inquiry 55 (1):50 - 65.
Joshua Knobe (2010). Person as Scientist, Person as Moralist. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33 (4):315.
Added to index2011-05-29
Total downloads33 ( #127,834 of 1,934,424 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #145,801 of 1,934,424 )
How can I increase my downloads?