David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Social Epistemology 20 (2):163 – 180 (2006)
Objectivity and value freedom have often been conflated in the philosophical and sociological literature. While value freedom construed as an absence of social and moral values in scientific work has been discredited, defenders of value freedom bracket off methodological values or practices from social and moral ones. In this paper I will first show how values exist along a continuum and argue that science is and should be value based. One of these values is necessarily objectivity for science to be possible. However the version of objectivity I will describe is socially situated in methodological practice, but also crucially in the particular purpose of a given science. Objectivity (or its absence) may be transferred vertically from practices, goals, or discourses outside science through several levels to that of the day-to-day activities of the scientist. It is also possible for this transfer to occur in the other direction and indeed objectivity can be situated in extra-scientific practices and discourses. Objectivity (or its absence) may also be transferred horizontally within particular methodological practice to other disciplines or parts of a discipline. Ultimately a socially situated objectivity is an achievement of the community of science. I will use some brief contemporary and historical illustrations from science and the intersection of science and public policy to show how objectivity has been achieved or failed.
|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
Keith Ashman & Phillip Barringer (2001). After the Science Wars: Science and the Study of Science. Routledge.
Alan Chalmers (1990). Science and its Fabrication. Univ of Minnesota Press.
Heather Douglas (2000). Inductive Risk and Values in Science. Philosophy of Science 67 (4):559-579.
Stephen Jay Gould (1981). The Mismeasure of Man. W.W. Norton and Company.
Ian Hacking (2002). Historical Ontology. Harvard University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Hugo Fjelsted Alrøe & Erik Steen Kristensen (2002). Towards a Systemic Research Methodology in Agriculture: Rethinking the Role of Values in Science. [REVIEW] Agriculture and Human Values 19 (1):3-23.
Andrew Collier, Margaret Scotford Archer & William Outhwaite (eds.) (2004). Defending Objectivity: Essays in Honour of Andrew Collier. Routledge.
Joseph F. Hanna (2004). The Scope and Limits of Scientific Objectivity. Philosophy of Science 71 (3):339-361.
Harold Kincaid, John Dupré & Alison Wylie (eds.) (2007). Value-Free Science?: Ideals and Illusions. Oxford University Press.
Philip Lewin (1984). IV. Longino and Heidegger on Objectivity. Inquiry 27 (1-4):145-148.
Jennifer Tannoch-Bland (1997). From Aperspectival Objectivity to Strong Objectivity: The Quest for Moral Objectivity. Hypatia 12 (1):155 - 178.
H. E. Longino (1983). Scientific Objectivity and the Logics of Science. Inquiry 26 (1):85 – 106.
Peter Railton (1984). Marx and the Objectivity of Science. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1984:813 - 826.
Sandra G. Harding (1978). Four Contributions Values Can Make to the Objectivity of Social Science. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1978:199 - 209.
Lorraine Daston (2007). Objectivity. Distributed by the MIT Press.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads59 ( #40,635 of 1,700,306 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #206,271 of 1,700,306 )
How can I increase my downloads?