Philosophia:1-8 (forthcoming)

Authors
Juan Colomina-Alminana
University of Texas at Austin
Abstract
, 3661–3678, 2020) argues that a positivistic defense of science’s objectivity is incoherent because bias in the generation of scientific theories (implies that the rational evaluation of theories will also be biased. Even though this is an idea easy to agree with, this approach is flawed for two different but related reasons. First, Dellsén’s notion of bias does not account for many ordinary biases. Second, Dellsén’s use of bias at the community-level is inconsistent. It shifts from individual scientists generating new theories and making decisions to scientific communities evaluating and accepting what theories are valid. This article offers a stronger response than Dellsén’s about aseptic objectivity in science by providing a more adequate account of bias, where psychological and behavioral aspects of individual scientists and community-level scientific practices are considered.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s11406-021-00366-y
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Translate to english
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 62,388
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

Scientific Perspectivism.Ronald N. Giere - 2006 - University of Chicago Press.
The Emotive Theory of Ethics.J. O. Urmson - 1968 - London: Hutchinson.

View all 12 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Cognition and the Structure of Bias.Gabbrielle Johnson - 2019 - Dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles
Future Bias and Presentism.Sayid Bnefsi - 2020 - In Per Hasle, Peter Øhrstrøm & David Jakobsen (eds.), The Metaphysics of Time: Themes from Prior. Aalborg: pp. 281-297.
Evidence and Bias.Nick Hughes - forthcoming - In Clayton Littlejohn & Maria Lasonen Aarnio (eds.), Routledge Handbook of the Philosophy of Evidence.
The “Bias” Bias in Social Psychology: Adaptive When and How?James Friedrich - 2004 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (3):335-336.
Does Scientific Progress Consist in Increasing Knowledge or Understanding?Seungbae Park - 2017 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 48 (4):569-579.
Understanding Bias in Scientific Practice.Nancy E. Shaffer - 1996 - Philosophy of Science 63 (3):97.
Rethinking prestige bias.Azita Chellappoo - forthcoming - Synthese:1-22.
Two Grades of Evidential Bias.Paul M. Churchland - 1975 - Philosophy of Science 42 (3):250-259.
Ranking Exercises in Philosophy and Implicit Bias.Jennifer Saul - 2012 - Journal of Social Philosophy 43 (3):256-273.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2021-04-04

Total views
6 ( #1,099,074 of 2,445,479 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
6 ( #122,535 of 2,445,479 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes