Synthese 191 (12):2751-2765 (2014)

Dissent is thought to play a valuable role in science, so that scientific communities ought to create opportunities for receiving critical feedback and take dissenting views seriously. There is concern, however, that some dissent does more harm than good. Dissent on climate change and evolutionary theory, for example, has confused the public, created doubt about existing consensus, derailed public policy, and forced scientists to devote resources to respond. Are there limits to the extent to which scientific communities have obligations to seek and engage dissenting views? We consider the two main criteria that have been offered for what constitutes “normatively appropriate dissent” or the sort of dissent that ought to have the opportunity to be heard and taken seriously. Many have argued that dissenters must (1) engage in uptake of criticism against their own views and (2) share some standards for theory appraisal. We argue these criteria ultimately are unsuccessful.
Keywords Scientific dissent  Uptake of criticism  Shared standards  Diversity
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s11229-014-0414-5
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: 69,078
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

The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.Thomas S. Kuhn - 1962 - University of Chicago Press.
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.Thomas Samuel Kuhn - 1962 - Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

View all 60 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

The Social Epistemology of Consensus and Dissent.Boaz Miller - 2019 - In David Henderson, Peter Graham, Miranda Fricker & Nikolaj Jang Lee Linding Pedersen (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Social Epistemology. New York: Routledge. pp. 228-237.

View all 7 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

On the Suppression of Vaccination Dissent.Brian Martin - 2015 - Science and Engineering Ethics 21 (1):143-157.
Consensus in Science.Miriam Solomon - 2001 - The Proceedings of the Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy 2001:193-204.
Here I Stand: Mediated Bodies in Dissent.D. R. Koukal - 2010 - Mediatropes 2 (2):109-127.


Added to PP index

Total views
85 ( #135,342 of 2,498,794 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
5 ( #139,531 of 2,498,794 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes