Abstract

I examine ramifications of the widespread view that scientific objectivity gives us a permission to trust scientific knowledge claims. According to a widely accepted account of trust and trustworthiness, trust in scientific knowledge claims involves both reliance on the claims and trust in scientists who present the claims, and trustworthiness depends on expertise, honesty, and social responsibility. Given this account, scientific objectivity turns out to be a hybrid concept with both an epistemic and a moral-political dimension. The epistemic dimension tells us when scientific knowledge claims are reliable, and the moral-political dimension tells us when we can trust scientists to be socially responsible. While the former dimension has received a fair amount of attention, the latter is in need of analysis. I examine what it means for scientists to be socially responsible, that is, to follow “sound” moral and social values in different stages of scientific inquiry (Kourany in Philosophy of science after feminism, Oxford University Press, New York, 2010). Social responsibility is especially important when scientists function as experts in society. Members of the public and policymakers do not want to rely on scientific research shaped by moral and social values they have good reasons to reject. Moreover, social responsibility is important in social research in which moral and social values can legitimately play many roles. I discuss the strengths and weaknesses of different answers to the question of how social scientists can identify appropriate moral and social values to inform their research. I argue that procedural accounts of social responsibility, such as well-ordered science and deliberative polling, have limitations.

Highlights

  • Recent years have witnessed a renewed interest in the concept of scientific objectivity (Alexandrova 2018; Eigi 2017; Koskinen 2017, 2018; Kusch 2017; Ludwig 2017; Padovani et al 2015)

  • According to a widely accepted account of trust and trustworthiness, trust in scientific knowledge claims involves both reliance on the claims and trust in scientists who present the claims, and trustworthiness depends on expertise, honesty, and social responsibility

  • When we find ourselves in a relation of epistemic dependence, trust in scientific knowledge claims involves not merely reliance on the claims and trust in scientists who present the claims

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Recent years have witnessed a renewed interest in the concept of scientific objectivity (Alexandrova 2018; Eigi 2017; Koskinen 2017, 2018; Kusch 2017; Ludwig 2017; Padovani et al 2015). 2 I will defend the view that social responsibility requires scientists to follow “sound” moral and social values in different stages of scientific inquiry The trusted person needs to meet the requirement of honesty and social responsibility to demonstrate goodwill towards those who are epistemically dependent on her 106; see Alexandrova 2018; Brown 2013; Intemann 2015; Rolin 2012) They believe that epistemic trust in scientists involves trust in their capacity to make sound moral and social value judgments in research I argue that scientific/intellectual movements have an important role to play in this strategy

The proper roles question
Argument from inductive risk
Argument from pluralism
Argument from normative background assumptions
Argument from qualitative data collection
The proper values question
Expert-driven approach
Market-driven approach
Government-driven approach
Procedural accounts of social responsibility
Well-ordered science
Deliberative polling
Criticism
Conclusions
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call