Abstract
Philip Kitcher and his program committee hoped to stimulate a lively debate this evening on the role which philosophers of science might play as advisors to government and the professional institutions of scientists. It is my guess that they had two changes in mind. They wanted more philosophers of science advising in Washington's science policy decisions. They also want you philosophers of science to develop those aspects of your field which are relevant to such decisions. They believe (I would guess) that not all of the scholarship of this association has such relevance, but that much of it does; that the relevant parts can still retain a genuinely epistemological,focus; and that science policy advice is better done by philosophers of science than by any other profession (e.g., the sociology of science). Perhaps I have merely projected these beliefs on to the program committee. They are, in any event, ones I hold and hope that they share.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callMore From: PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
