Abstract
There are now several proposals for introducing random elements into the process of funding allocation for research, and some initial implementation of this policy by funding bodies. The proposals have been supported on efficiency grounds, with models, including social epistemology models, showing random allocation could increase the generation of significant truths in a community of scientists when compared to funding by peer review. The models in the literature are, however, fairly abstract. This paper introduces some of the considerations that are required to build on the modelling work towards a fully-fledged policy proposal, including issues of cost and fairness.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 70,163
External links

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

Is Water H2O? Evidence, Realism and Pluralism.Hasok Chang - 2012 - Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science.
Experts: Which Ones Should You Trust?Alvin I. Goldman - 2001 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 63 (1):85-110.

View all 16 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Mavericks and Lotteries.Shahar Avin - 2019 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 76:13-23.
The Division of Cognitive Labor: Two Missing Dimensions of the Debate.Baptiste Bedessem - 2018 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 9 (1):3.
The Division of Cognitive Labor: Two Missing Dimensions of the Debate.Baptiste Bedessem - 2018 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 9 (1):1-16.

View all 8 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Centralized Funding and Epistemic Exploration.Shahar Avin - 2017 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science:axx059.
Ethical Issues in Funding Orphan Drug Research and Development.C. A. Gericke - 2005 - Journal of Medical Ethics 31 (3):164-168.
Evaluation of Research(Ers) and its Threat to Epistemic Pluralisms.Marco Viola - 2017 - European Journal of Analytic Philosophy 13 (2):55-78.
Another Peep Behind the Veil.J. McKie, H. Kuhse, J. Richardson & P. Singer - 1996 - Journal of Medical Ethics 22 (4):216-221.
Medical Decision Making in Scarcity Situations.J. J. M. van Delden - 2004 - Journal of Medical Ethics 30 (2):207-211.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2018-07-18

Total views
11 ( #852,343 of 2,506,511 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #277,244 of 2,506,511 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes