Arlo, Looks excellent based on the intro, must read the whole thing.
I particularly like this ... "The popular conceptions--both that science is value-free and that objectivity is best exemplified by scientific fact--are overstated and misleading. This does not oblige us, however, to abandon science or objectivity, or to embrace an uneasy relativism. First, science does express a wealth of epistemic values and inevitably incorporates cultural values in practice ...." Thanks for the link. Ian On 8/4/08, Arlo Bensinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > All, > > Stumbled on an interesting paper. "Values in Science" by Douglas Allchin. > This struck some MOQ chords with me. > > http://www1.umn.edu/ships/ethics/values.htm > > "ABSTRACT. Values intersect with science in three primary ways. First, there > are values, particularly epistemic values, which guide scientific research > itself. Second, the scientific enterprise is always embedded in some > particular culture and values enter science through its individual > practitioners, whether consciously or not. Finally, values emerge from > science, both as a product and process, and may be redistributed more > broadly in the culture or society. Also, scientific discoveries may pose new > social challenges about values, though the values themselves may be > conventional. Several questions help guide disciplined inquiry into ethics > and values." > > Below is the short introduction, the article is also concise for those > wishing a short but enjoyable read. > > "A fundamental feature of science, as conceived by most scientists, is that > it deals with facts, not values. Further, science is objective, while values > are not. These benchmarks can offer great comfort to scientists, who often > see themselves as working in the privileged domain of certain and permanent > knowledge. Such views of science are also closely allied in the public > sphere with the authority of scientists and the powerful imprimatur of > evidence as "scientific". Recently, however, sociologists of science, among > others, have challenged the notion of science as value-free and thereby > raised questions--especially important for emerging scientists--about the > authority of science and its methods. > > The popular conceptions--both that science is value-free and that > objectivity is best exemplified by scientific fact--are overstated and > misleading. This does not oblige us, however, to abandon science or > objectivity, or to embrace an uneasy relativism. First, science does express > a wealth of epistemic values and inevitably incorporates cultural values in > practice. But this need not be a threat: some values in science govern how > we regulate the potentially biasing effect of other values in producing > reliable knowledge. Indeed, a diversity of values promotes more robust > knowledge where they intersect. Second, values can be equally objective when > they require communal justification and must thereby be based on generally > accepted principles. In what follows, I survey broadly the relation of > science and values, sample important recent findings in the history, > philosophy and sociology of science, and suggest generally how to address > these issues (this essay is adapted from Allchin, 1998)." > > Arlo > > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ > Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
