Perspectives on Science 8 (4):367-379 (2000)
Scientists are divided on the status of hypothesis H that low doses of ionizing radiation (under 20 rads) cause hormetic (or non-harmful) effects. Military and industrial scientist s tend to accept H, while medical and environmental scientists tend to reject it. Proponents of the strong programme claim this debate shows that uncertain science can be clari ed only by greater attention to the social values in uencing it. While they are in part correct, this paper argues that methodological analyses (not merely attention to social values) also can help clarify uncertain science. The paper analyzes ve measurement uncertainties , as well as seven methodological value judgments, relevant to H. Using criteria of internal and external consistency, as well as predictive power, it argues that metascience also helps resolve this debate. And if so, then value-laden, policy-relevan t science may need, not only more attention to social values in order to resolve and to clarify disputes, but also more conceptual and methodological analyses of science. (This paper suggests what such methodological analyses might be like and uses the case of low-dose risks from radiation to illustrate its points, while a companion paper (“Chemical Hormesis, Conceptual Clari cation, and the Warrant for Policy-Driven Science”) in this same issue of POS suggests what such conceptual analyses might be like and uses the case of low-dose risks from chemicals to illustrate its points.) If this paper’s thesis holds in the very politicize d “hard case” of radiation hormesis, then it suggests that the metascientist s may be right about what is also often necessary to clarify scienti c disputes.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Non-Cognitive Values and Methodological Learning in the Decision-Oriented Sciences.Oliver Todt & José Luis Luján - 2017 - Foundations of Science 22 (1):215-234.
Similar books and articles
Using Metascience to Improve Dose‐Response Curves in Biology: Better Policy Through Better Science.Kristin Shrader‐Frechette - 2004 - Philosophy of Science 71 (5):1026-1037.
Better Policy Through Better Science: Using Metascience to Improve Dose-Response Curves in Biology and in ICRP Ecological Risk Assessment.Kristin Shrader-Frechette - unknown
Conceptual Clarification and Policy-Related Science: The Case of Chemical Hormesis.Kevin Elliott - 2000 - Perspectives on Science 8 (4):346-366.
A Novel Account of Scientific Anomaly: Help for the Dispute Over Low-Dose Biochemical Effects.Kevin C. Elliott - 2006 - Philosophy of Science 73 (5):790-802.
Using a Thought Experiment to Clarify a Radiobiological Controversy.Kristan Shrader-Frechete - 2001 - Synthese 128 (3):319 - 342.
Conceptual Analysis and Special-Interest Science: Toxicology and the Case of Edward Calabrese.Kristin Shrader-Frechette - 2010 - Synthese 177 (3):449 - 469.
Biological Effects of Low Level Radiation: Values, Dose-Response Models, Risk Estimates.Helen E. Longino - 1989 - Synthese 81 (3):391 - 404.
Reply to Daniel Steel's "with or Without Mechanisms".Erik Weber - 2008 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 38 (2):267-270.
Radiobiogical Hormesis, Methodological Value Judgments, and Metascience.K. S. Shrader-Frechette - 2000 - Perspectives on Science 8 (4):367-379.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads119 ( #41,181 of 2,171,692 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #326,424 of 2,171,692 )
How can I increase my downloads?