Synthese 194 (12):4671-4686 (2017)
AbstractThis article focuses on epistemic challenges related to the democratisation of scientific knowledge production, and to the limitations of current social accounts of objectivity. A process of ’democratisation’ can be observed in many scientific and academic fields today. Collaboration with extra-academic agents and the use of extra-academic expertise and knowledge has become common, and researchers are interested in promoting socially inclusive research practices. As this development is particularly prevalent in policy-relevant research, it is important that the new, more democratic forms of research be objective. In social accounts of objectivity only epistemic communities are taken to be able to produce objective knowledge, or the entity whose objectivity is to be assessed is precisely such a community. As I argue, these accounts do not allow for situations where it is not easy to identify the relevant epistemic community. Democratisation of scientific knowledge production can lead to such situations. As an example, I discuss attempts to link indigenous oral traditions to floods and tsunamis that happened hundreds or even thousands of years ago.
Similar books and articles
A Plurality of Pluralisms: Collaborative Practice in Archaeology.Alison Wylie - 2015 - In Jonathan Y. Tsou, Alan Richardson & Flavia Padovani (eds.), Objectivity in Science. Springer Verlag. pp. 189-210.
Scientific Objectivity and Scientific Objectives.Evelyn Louise Brister - 2002 - Dissertation, Northwestern University
Different motivations, similar proposals: objectivity in scientific community and democratic science policy.Jaana Eigi - 2017 - Synthese 194 (12):4657-4669.
Autonomy and Objectivity of Science.Jouni-Matti Kuukkanen - 2012 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 26 (3):309-334.
Fleck and the social constitution of scientific objectivity.Melinda B. Fagan - 2009 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 40 (4):272-285.
Review of Sandra Harding's Objectivity and Diversity. [REVIEW]María G. Navarro & Kamili Posey - 2016 - Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 5 (4):60-64.
Objectivity in Science: New Perspectives From Science and Technology Studies.Flavia Padovani, Alan Richardson & Jonathan Y. Tsou (eds.) - 2015 - Cham: Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science, vol. 310. Springer.
History of Epistemic Communities and Collaborative Research.K. Brad Wray - 2015 - In James D. Wright (ed.), International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences (Second Edition). Elsevier. pp. 867-872.
Using science, making policy: what should we worry about?Eleonora Montuschi - 2017 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 7 (1):57-78.
Scientific Knowledge and Scientific Expertise: Epistemic and Social Conditions of Their Trustworthiness.Martin Carrier - 2010 - Analyse & Kritik 32 (2):195-212.
On the Social Nature of Objectivity: Helen Longino and Justin Biddle.Jaana Eigi - 2015 - Theoria: Revista de Teoría, Historia y Fundamentos de la Ciencia 30 (3):449-463.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Towards a socially constructed and objective concept of mental disorder.Anne-Marie Gagné-Julien - 2021 - Synthese 198 (10):9401-9426.
Democratizing Strategies for Industry-Funded Medical Research: A Cautionary Tale.Manuela Fernández Pinto - 2018 - Philosophy of Science 85 (5):882-894.
Genuine versus bogus scientific controversies: the case of statins.Carlo Martini & Mattia Andreoletti - 2021 - History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 43 (4):1-23.
References found in this work
Science as Social Knowledge: Values and Objectivity in Scientific Inquiry.Helen E. Longino (ed.) - 1990 - Princeton University Press.