David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophy of Science 71 (5):1026-1037 (2004)
Many people argue that uncertain science—or controversial policies based on science—can be clarified primarily by greater attention to social/political values influencing the science and by greater attention to the vested interests involved. This paper argues that while such clarification is necessary, it is not a sufficient condition for achieving better science and policy; indeed its importance may be overemphasized. Using a case study involving the current, highly politicized controversy over the shape of dose‐response curves for biological effects of ionizing radiation, the paper argues that the conflict could be significantly resolved through specific methodological improvements in the areas of metascience and philosophy of science. These improvements focus on taking account, respectively, of scale, data trimming, aggregation, measurability, and simplicity.
|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
Torsten Wilholt (2009). Bias and Values in Scientific Research. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 40 (1):92-101.
José Luis Luján, Oliver Todt & Juan Bautista Bengoetxea (forthcoming). Mechanistic Information as Evidence in Decision-Oriented Science. Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie:1-14.
Similar books and articles
Kristin Shrader-Frechette (2006). Comparativist Philosophy of Science and Population Viability Assessment in Biology: Helping Resolve Scientific Controversy. Philosophy of Science 73 (5):817-828.
Helen E. Longino (1989). Biological Effects of Low Level Radiation: Values, Dose-Response Models, Risk Estimates. Synthese 81 (3):391 - 404.
Sandra Eady (2008). What Is the Purpose of Learning Science? An Analysis of Policy and Practice in the Primary School. British Journal of Educational Studies 56 (1):4 - 19.
Kevin C. Elliott (2006). A Novel Account of Scientific Anomaly: Help for the Dispute Over Low-Dose Biochemical Effects. Philosophy of Science 73 (5):790-802.
Kristan Shrader-Frechete (2001). Using a Thought Experiment to Clarify a Radiobiological Controversy. Synthese 128 (3):319 - 342.
Kristin Shrader-Frechette (2001). Radiobiological Hormesis, Methodological Value Judgments, and Metascience. Perspectives on Science 8 (4):367-379.
K. Shrader-Frechette, Ideological Toxicology: Invalid Logic, Science, Ethics About Low-Dose Pollution.
K. S. Shrader-Frechette (2000). Radiobiogical Hormesis, Methodological Value Judgments, and Metascience. Perspectives on Science 8 (4):367-379.
Kristin Shrader-Frechette (2004). Using Metascience to Improve Dose-Response Curves in Biology: Better Policy Through Better Science. Philosophy of Science 71 (5):1026-1037.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads1 ( #647,778 of 1,726,249 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #369,877 of 1,726,249 )
How can I increase my downloads?