The question of the unique meaning of scientific objectivity unity of a negative and a positive account
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
Published
12/17/2024
Iñaki Requejo Aramendi
Abstract
To talk about scientific objectivity is to talk about its multiple senses. There is a broad consensus among philosophers of science that objectivity assessments are done in different ways in different contexts. The aim of this article is to argue that these conceptions share a general idea. To do that, I describe current ideas on the subject, such as the idea of epistemic risk or the negative account (Koskinen 2018). It is clarified that the approach based on the epistemic risk is not sufficient to constitute a general meaning. In other words, the negative account based on epistemic risk is just one side of the coin, on the other side we will find a positive account. It is not only about adding processes to identify, avoid or mitigate epistemic risk, but also to incorporate processes that allow legitimate non-epistemic values. The latter relates to the new demarcation problem currently being developed. To reflect this, I describe a real case: selective reporting of evidence in ecology.
How to Cite
Requejo Aramendi, I. (2024). The question of the unique meaning of scientific objectivity: unity of a negative and a positive account. Gogoa, 25. https://doi.org/10.1387/gogoa.25855
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
Keywords
positive account;, scientific objectivity, value-free ideal, plurality, epistemic risk, negative account, positive account
References
Alexandrova, Anna. 2018. "Can the science of well-being be objective?”. Hypatia 19: 1-24.
Anderson, Elizabeth. 2004. "Uses of values judgements in science: a general argument, with lessons from case study of feminist research on divorce". Hypatia 19: 1-24.
Arrieta Urtizberea, Agustin. 2017. Zientziaren argi-itzalak. Bilbo: Udako Euskal Unibertsitatea.
Axtell, Guy. 2016. Objectivity. Cambridge: Polity.
Biddle, Justin. 2013. "State of field: transient underdetermination and values in science". Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 44: 124-33.
Biddle, Justin eta Rebecca Kukla. 2017. "The geography of epistemic risk". In K. Elliot eta T. Richardson (arg.), Exploring inductive risk: case studies of values in science. New York: Oxford University, 215-38.
Brown, Matthew J. 2013. "Values in science beyond underdetermination and inductive risk". Philosophy of Science 80 (5): 829-39.
Brown, Matthew J. 2019. "Is science really value free and objective? From objectivity to scientific integrity". In K. McKain eta K. Kampouaris (arg.), What is scientific knowledge? An introduction to contemporary epistemology of science 15. London: Routledge, 219-35.
Burch, Matthew eta Katherine Furman. 2019. "Objectivity in science and law: a shared rescue strategy". International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 64: 60–70.
Cartwright, Nancy, Jeremy Hardie, Eleonora Montuschi, Mathew Soleiman eta Anne Thresher. 2022. Objectivity the tangle of science: reliability beyond method, rigor, and objectivity. New York: Oxford University Press
Churchman, C. West. 1948. "Statics, pragmatics, induction". Philosophy of Science 15: 249-68.
Crasnow, Sharon. 2021. "Coherence objectivity and measurement: the example of democracy". Synthese 199: 1207-29.
Cupani, Alberto. 2011. "Acerca de la vigencia del ideal de objetividad". Scientiae Studia 9(3): 501-25. Daston, Lorrain eta Peter Galison. 2007. Objectivity. New York: Zone Books.
Diéguez, Antonio. 2024. La ciencia en cuestión. Disenso, negación y objetividad. Bartzelona: Herder.
Dorato, Mauro. 2004. "Epistemic and non-epistemic values in science". In Peter K. Machamer eta Science, values, and objectivity. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 52-77.
Douglas, Heather. 2000. "Inductive risk and values in science". Philosophy of Science 67 (4): 559-79. Gereon Wolters (arg.), 77.
Douglas, Heather. 2003. "The moral responsibilities of scientists: tension between autonomy and responsibility". American Philosophical Quarterly 40: 59-68.
Douglas, Heather. 2004. "The irreducible complexity of objectivity". Synthese 138 (3): 453-73.
Douglas, Heather. 2007. "Rejecting the ideal of value-free science”. In H. Kincaid, J. Dupre eta A. Wylie (arg.), Value-free science? Ideals and illusions. New York: Oxford University press, 120-39.
Douglas, Heather. 2009b. Science, policy, and the value-free ideal. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Douglas, Heather. 2016. "Values in social science". In N. Cartwright eta E. Montuschi (arg.), Philosophy of social science: a new introduction. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 162-82.
Elliot, Kevin. 2017. A tapestry of values: an introduction to values in science. New York: Oxford University Press.
Elliot, Kevin. 2022. Values in science. Cambridge: Cambridge Elements.
Fausto-Sterling, Anne. 1985. Myths of gender: Biological theories about women and men. New York. NY: Basic Books.
Feyerabend, Paul K. 1975. Against method. Londres: Verso. [Gaztelaniazko itzulpena: 1981. Tratado contra el método. Madril: Tecnos. Itzultzailea: Diego Ribes].
Fine, Arthur. 1998. "The viewpoint of no-one in particular". Proceedings and Addresses of the APA 72: 9-20.
Fricker, Miranda. 2007. Epistemic injustice. Power and the etics of knowing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gaa, James. 1977. "Moral autonomy and the rationality of science". Philosophy of Science 44: 513-41.
Gaukroger, Stephen. 2012. Objectivity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hacking, Ian. 2015. "Let’s not talk about objectivity”. In F. Padovani, A. Richardson eta J. Tsou (arg.), Objectivity in science. Cham: Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science 310: Springer, 19-33.
Haraway, Donna. J. 1989. Primate visions: gender, race, and nature in the world of modern science. New York and London: Routledge.
Harding, Sandra G. 1986. The science question in feminism. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Harvard, Stephanie eta Matthew J. Brown. 2017. "Inductive risk, deferred decisions, and climate science advising". Canadian Journal of Philosophy. http://doi.org/10.1017/can.2021.15
Harvard, Stephanie eta Eric Winsberg. 2021. "The epistemic risk in representation". Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 32: 1-31.
Hempel, Carl G. 1965. "Science and human values". In Aspects of Scientific Explanation. New York: The Free Press, 81-96.
Hempel, Carl G. 1981. "Turns in the evolution of the problem of induction". Synthese 46. Berrargitaratua in James H. Fetzer (arg.), 2001, The philosophy of Carl G. Hempel: Studies in science, explanation, and rationality. New York: Oxford University Press, 344-56.
Holman, Bennet eta Torsten Wilholt. 2023. "The new demarcation problem". Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 91: 211-20.
Intemann, Kristen. 2015. "Feminism, values and the bias paradox". In K. C. Elliot eta D. Steel (arg.), Current controversies in values and science. New York: Routledge: 130-44.
Janack, Marianne. 2002. "Dilemmas of objectivity". Social Epistemology 16 (3): 267-81.
John, Stephen. 2021. Objectivity in science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Printing House.
Kaitlin Kimmek, Meghan L. Avolio eta Paul L. Ferraro. 2023. "Empirical evidence of widespread exaggeration bias and selective reporting in ecology". Nature Ecology and Evolution 7: 1525-36.
Keller, Evelyn F. eta Helen E. Longino. 1996. Feminism and science. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Keller, Evelyn F. 1985. Reflections on gender and science. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Kimmel, Kaitlin, Megan L. Avolio eta Paul J. Ferraro. 2023. “Empirical evidence of widespread exaggeration bias and selective reporting in ecology”. Nature Ecology and Evolution 7: 1525-36.
Kitcher, Philip. 2001. Science, truth, and democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Koskinen, Inkeri. 2018. "Defending a risk account of scientific objectivity". The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 71: 1187-207.
Koskinen, Inkeri. 2021. "Objectivity in context: withholding epistemic judgement as a strategy for mitigating collective bias". Synthese 199: 211-25.
Koskinen, Inkeri. 2023. "Participation and objectivity". Philosophy of Science 90 (2): 413-32.
Kourany, Janet, A. 2010. Philosophy of science after feminism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kuhn, Thomas. S. 1977. "Objectivity, value judgment, and theory choice". In T. S. Kuhn (arg.), the essential tension-selected studies in scientific tradition and change. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Lacey, Hugh. 1999. Is science value-free? Values and scientific understanding. New York eta Londres: Routledge.
Lacey, Hugh. 2005. Is science value-free? London: Routledge.
Leach, James. 1968. "Explanation and value neutrality". British Journal of Philosophy of Science 19: 93-108.
Lloyd, Elizabeth. 1995. "Objectivity and the double standard for feminist epistemologies". Synthese 104 (3): 351-81.
Longino, Helen E. 1990. Science as social knowledge: values and objectivity in scientific inquiry. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Longino, Helen E. 1995. "Gender, politics, and the theoretical virtues". Synthese 104 (3): 383-97.
Longino, Helen E. 1996. "Cognitive and non-cognitive values in science: Rethinking the dichotomy". In Lynn Hankinson Nelson eta Jack Nelson (arg.), Feminism, science, and the philosophy of science. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers: 39-58.
Longino, Helen E. 2002. The fate of knowledge. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Lusk, Greg. 2020. "Political legitimacy in the democratic view: the case of climate services". Philosophy
of Science 87: 991-1002.
Machamer, Peter eta Heather E. Douglas. 1999. "Cognitive and social values". Science and Education 8:45-54.
Martin, Emily. 1996. "The egg and the sperm: How science has constructed a romance based on stereotypical male-female roles". In E. F. Keller eta H. Longino (arg.), Feminism and science. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 103-17.
Montuschi, Eleonora. 2021. “Finding a context for objectivity”. Synthese 199: 4061-76.
Nagel, Thomas. 1986. The view from nowhere. New York: Oxford University Press.
Nelson, Lynn. 1990. Who knows: From Quine to a feminist empiricism. Philadelphia. PA: Temple University Press.
Neurath, Otto. 1973 [1921]. "Anti-Spengler". M. Neurath eta R. S. Cohen (arg.), Empiricism and sociology. Vienna Circle Collection 1. Springer, Dordrecht: 158-213.
Oreskes, Naomi eta Erik M. Conway. 2011. Merchants of doubt: How a handful of scientists obscured the truth on issues from tobacco smoke to global warming. Londres: Bloomsbury Publishing PLC. [Gaztelaniazko itzulpena: 2011. Mercaderes de la duda. Cómo un
puñado de científicos ocultaron la la verdad sobre el calentamiento global. Madril: Capitan Swing. Itzultzailea: José Manuel Álvarez-Flórez.]
Porter, Theodore. 1995. Trust in numbers: The pursuit of objectivity in science and public life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Prescod-Weinstein, Chanda. 2021. The disordered cosmos: A journey into dark matter, spacetime, and dreams deferred. New York: Bold Type Books. [Gaztelaniazko itzulpena: 2021. El cosmos desordenado: Un viaje a la materia oscura, espacio-tiempo y los sueños postergados. Madril: Capitan Swing. Itzultzailea: Inga Pellisa].
Proctor, Robert. 1991. Value-free science? Purity and power in modern knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Quine, Willard. V. O. 1992. The pursuit of truth. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Reiss, Julian eta Jan Sprenger. 2020. "Scientific objectivity". In N. Edward Zalta (arg.), The Stanford
Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/scientific-objectivity/ Rooney, Paul. 1992. "On values in science: Is the epistemic/non-epistemic distinction useful?
13-22.
Rudner, Richard. 1953. "The scientist qua scientist makes value judgements". Philosophy of science 20: 1-6.
Scheman, Naomi. 2001. "Epistemology resuscitated: objectivity as trustworthiness". In Nancy Tuana eta Sandra Morgen (arg.), Engendering rationalities. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 23- 52.
Schroeder, Andrew S. 2019. "Which values should be built into economic measures?". Economics and Philosophy 35: 521-36.
Scriven, Michael. 1974. "The exact role of value judgement in science". In F. Kenneth eta Robert S. Cohen (arg.), PSA 1972: Proceedings of the 1972 biennial meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association. Dordrecht: Reidel, 219-47.
Solomon, Miriam. 2007. Social empiricism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Steel, Daniel. 2010. "Epistemic values and the argument from inductive risk". Philosophy of Science 77 (1): 14-34.
Tsou, Jonathan Y., Alan Richardson eta Flavia Padovani. 2015. "Introduction: objectivity in science". In F. Padovani, A. Richardson eta J. Y. Tsou (arg.), Objectivity in science: New perspectives from science and technology studies. Cham: Springer, 1-15.
Williams, Bernard. 1986. Ethics and the limits of philosophy. Londres: Fontana Press.
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1953. Philosophical investigations. Londres: Basil Blackwell. [Gaztelaniazko itzulpena: 1999. Investigaciones filosóficas. Bartzelona: Ediciones Altaya. Itzultzaileak: Alfonso García Suárez eta Ulises Moulines].
Wright, Jack. 2018. "Rescuing objectivity: a contextualist proposal". Philosophy of the Social Sciences 48 (4): 385-406.
Anderson, Elizabeth. 2004. "Uses of values judgements in science: a general argument, with lessons from case study of feminist research on divorce". Hypatia 19: 1-24.
Arrieta Urtizberea, Agustin. 2017. Zientziaren argi-itzalak. Bilbo: Udako Euskal Unibertsitatea.
Axtell, Guy. 2016. Objectivity. Cambridge: Polity.
Biddle, Justin. 2013. "State of field: transient underdetermination and values in science". Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 44: 124-33.
Biddle, Justin eta Rebecca Kukla. 2017. "The geography of epistemic risk". In K. Elliot eta T. Richardson (arg.), Exploring inductive risk: case studies of values in science. New York: Oxford University, 215-38.
Brown, Matthew J. 2013. "Values in science beyond underdetermination and inductive risk". Philosophy of Science 80 (5): 829-39.
Brown, Matthew J. 2019. "Is science really value free and objective? From objectivity to scientific integrity". In K. McKain eta K. Kampouaris (arg.), What is scientific knowledge? An introduction to contemporary epistemology of science 15. London: Routledge, 219-35.
Burch, Matthew eta Katherine Furman. 2019. "Objectivity in science and law: a shared rescue strategy". International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 64: 60–70.
Cartwright, Nancy, Jeremy Hardie, Eleonora Montuschi, Mathew Soleiman eta Anne Thresher. 2022. Objectivity the tangle of science: reliability beyond method, rigor, and objectivity. New York: Oxford University Press
Churchman, C. West. 1948. "Statics, pragmatics, induction". Philosophy of Science 15: 249-68.
Crasnow, Sharon. 2021. "Coherence objectivity and measurement: the example of democracy". Synthese 199: 1207-29.
Cupani, Alberto. 2011. "Acerca de la vigencia del ideal de objetividad". Scientiae Studia 9(3): 501-25. Daston, Lorrain eta Peter Galison. 2007. Objectivity. New York: Zone Books.
Diéguez, Antonio. 2024. La ciencia en cuestión. Disenso, negación y objetividad. Bartzelona: Herder.
Dorato, Mauro. 2004. "Epistemic and non-epistemic values in science". In Peter K. Machamer eta Science, values, and objectivity. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 52-77.
Douglas, Heather. 2000. "Inductive risk and values in science". Philosophy of Science 67 (4): 559-79. Gereon Wolters (arg.), 77.
Douglas, Heather. 2003. "The moral responsibilities of scientists: tension between autonomy and responsibility". American Philosophical Quarterly 40: 59-68.
Douglas, Heather. 2004. "The irreducible complexity of objectivity". Synthese 138 (3): 453-73.
Douglas, Heather. 2007. "Rejecting the ideal of value-free science”. In H. Kincaid, J. Dupre eta A. Wylie (arg.), Value-free science? Ideals and illusions. New York: Oxford University press, 120-39.
Douglas, Heather. 2009b. Science, policy, and the value-free ideal. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Douglas, Heather. 2016. "Values in social science". In N. Cartwright eta E. Montuschi (arg.), Philosophy of social science: a new introduction. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 162-82.
Elliot, Kevin. 2017. A tapestry of values: an introduction to values in science. New York: Oxford University Press.
Elliot, Kevin. 2022. Values in science. Cambridge: Cambridge Elements.
Fausto-Sterling, Anne. 1985. Myths of gender: Biological theories about women and men. New York. NY: Basic Books.
Feyerabend, Paul K. 1975. Against method. Londres: Verso. [Gaztelaniazko itzulpena: 1981. Tratado contra el método. Madril: Tecnos. Itzultzailea: Diego Ribes].
Fine, Arthur. 1998. "The viewpoint of no-one in particular". Proceedings and Addresses of the APA 72: 9-20.
Fricker, Miranda. 2007. Epistemic injustice. Power and the etics of knowing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gaa, James. 1977. "Moral autonomy and the rationality of science". Philosophy of Science 44: 513-41.
Gaukroger, Stephen. 2012. Objectivity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hacking, Ian. 2015. "Let’s not talk about objectivity”. In F. Padovani, A. Richardson eta J. Tsou (arg.), Objectivity in science. Cham: Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science 310: Springer, 19-33.
Haraway, Donna. J. 1989. Primate visions: gender, race, and nature in the world of modern science. New York and London: Routledge.
Harding, Sandra G. 1986. The science question in feminism. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Harvard, Stephanie eta Matthew J. Brown. 2017. "Inductive risk, deferred decisions, and climate science advising". Canadian Journal of Philosophy. http://doi.org/10.1017/can.2021.15
Harvard, Stephanie eta Eric Winsberg. 2021. "The epistemic risk in representation". Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 32: 1-31.
Hempel, Carl G. 1965. "Science and human values". In Aspects of Scientific Explanation. New York: The Free Press, 81-96.
Hempel, Carl G. 1981. "Turns in the evolution of the problem of induction". Synthese 46. Berrargitaratua in James H. Fetzer (arg.), 2001, The philosophy of Carl G. Hempel: Studies in science, explanation, and rationality. New York: Oxford University Press, 344-56.
Holman, Bennet eta Torsten Wilholt. 2023. "The new demarcation problem". Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 91: 211-20.
Intemann, Kristen. 2015. "Feminism, values and the bias paradox". In K. C. Elliot eta D. Steel (arg.), Current controversies in values and science. New York: Routledge: 130-44.
Janack, Marianne. 2002. "Dilemmas of objectivity". Social Epistemology 16 (3): 267-81.
John, Stephen. 2021. Objectivity in science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Printing House.
Kaitlin Kimmek, Meghan L. Avolio eta Paul L. Ferraro. 2023. "Empirical evidence of widespread exaggeration bias and selective reporting in ecology". Nature Ecology and Evolution 7: 1525-36.
Keller, Evelyn F. eta Helen E. Longino. 1996. Feminism and science. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Keller, Evelyn F. 1985. Reflections on gender and science. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Kimmel, Kaitlin, Megan L. Avolio eta Paul J. Ferraro. 2023. “Empirical evidence of widespread exaggeration bias and selective reporting in ecology”. Nature Ecology and Evolution 7: 1525-36.
Kitcher, Philip. 2001. Science, truth, and democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Koskinen, Inkeri. 2018. "Defending a risk account of scientific objectivity". The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 71: 1187-207.
Koskinen, Inkeri. 2021. "Objectivity in context: withholding epistemic judgement as a strategy for mitigating collective bias". Synthese 199: 211-25.
Koskinen, Inkeri. 2023. "Participation and objectivity". Philosophy of Science 90 (2): 413-32.
Kourany, Janet, A. 2010. Philosophy of science after feminism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kuhn, Thomas. S. 1977. "Objectivity, value judgment, and theory choice". In T. S. Kuhn (arg.), the essential tension-selected studies in scientific tradition and change. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Lacey, Hugh. 1999. Is science value-free? Values and scientific understanding. New York eta Londres: Routledge.
Lacey, Hugh. 2005. Is science value-free? London: Routledge.
Leach, James. 1968. "Explanation and value neutrality". British Journal of Philosophy of Science 19: 93-108.
Lloyd, Elizabeth. 1995. "Objectivity and the double standard for feminist epistemologies". Synthese 104 (3): 351-81.
Longino, Helen E. 1990. Science as social knowledge: values and objectivity in scientific inquiry. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Longino, Helen E. 1995. "Gender, politics, and the theoretical virtues". Synthese 104 (3): 383-97.
Longino, Helen E. 1996. "Cognitive and non-cognitive values in science: Rethinking the dichotomy". In Lynn Hankinson Nelson eta Jack Nelson (arg.), Feminism, science, and the philosophy of science. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers: 39-58.
Longino, Helen E. 2002. The fate of knowledge. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Lusk, Greg. 2020. "Political legitimacy in the democratic view: the case of climate services". Philosophy
of Science 87: 991-1002.
Machamer, Peter eta Heather E. Douglas. 1999. "Cognitive and social values". Science and Education 8:45-54.
Martin, Emily. 1996. "The egg and the sperm: How science has constructed a romance based on stereotypical male-female roles". In E. F. Keller eta H. Longino (arg.), Feminism and science. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 103-17.
Montuschi, Eleonora. 2021. “Finding a context for objectivity”. Synthese 199: 4061-76.
Nagel, Thomas. 1986. The view from nowhere. New York: Oxford University Press.
Nelson, Lynn. 1990. Who knows: From Quine to a feminist empiricism. Philadelphia. PA: Temple University Press.
Neurath, Otto. 1973 [1921]. "Anti-Spengler". M. Neurath eta R. S. Cohen (arg.), Empiricism and sociology. Vienna Circle Collection 1. Springer, Dordrecht: 158-213.
Oreskes, Naomi eta Erik M. Conway. 2011. Merchants of doubt: How a handful of scientists obscured the truth on issues from tobacco smoke to global warming. Londres: Bloomsbury Publishing PLC. [Gaztelaniazko itzulpena: 2011. Mercaderes de la duda. Cómo un
puñado de científicos ocultaron la la verdad sobre el calentamiento global. Madril: Capitan Swing. Itzultzailea: José Manuel Álvarez-Flórez.]
Porter, Theodore. 1995. Trust in numbers: The pursuit of objectivity in science and public life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Prescod-Weinstein, Chanda. 2021. The disordered cosmos: A journey into dark matter, spacetime, and dreams deferred. New York: Bold Type Books. [Gaztelaniazko itzulpena: 2021. El cosmos desordenado: Un viaje a la materia oscura, espacio-tiempo y los sueños postergados. Madril: Capitan Swing. Itzultzailea: Inga Pellisa].
Proctor, Robert. 1991. Value-free science? Purity and power in modern knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Quine, Willard. V. O. 1992. The pursuit of truth. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Reiss, Julian eta Jan Sprenger. 2020. "Scientific objectivity". In N. Edward Zalta (arg.), The Stanford
Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/scientific-objectivity/ Rooney, Paul. 1992. "On values in science: Is the epistemic/non-epistemic distinction useful?
13-22.
Rudner, Richard. 1953. "The scientist qua scientist makes value judgements". Philosophy of science 20: 1-6.
Scheman, Naomi. 2001. "Epistemology resuscitated: objectivity as trustworthiness". In Nancy Tuana eta Sandra Morgen (arg.), Engendering rationalities. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 23- 52.
Schroeder, Andrew S. 2019. "Which values should be built into economic measures?". Economics and Philosophy 35: 521-36.
Scriven, Michael. 1974. "The exact role of value judgement in science". In F. Kenneth eta Robert S. Cohen (arg.), PSA 1972: Proceedings of the 1972 biennial meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association. Dordrecht: Reidel, 219-47.
Solomon, Miriam. 2007. Social empiricism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Steel, Daniel. 2010. "Epistemic values and the argument from inductive risk". Philosophy of Science 77 (1): 14-34.
Tsou, Jonathan Y., Alan Richardson eta Flavia Padovani. 2015. "Introduction: objectivity in science". In F. Padovani, A. Richardson eta J. Y. Tsou (arg.), Objectivity in science: New perspectives from science and technology studies. Cham: Springer, 1-15.
Williams, Bernard. 1986. Ethics and the limits of philosophy. Londres: Fontana Press.
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1953. Philosophical investigations. Londres: Basil Blackwell. [Gaztelaniazko itzulpena: 1999. Investigaciones filosóficas. Bartzelona: Ediciones Altaya. Itzultzaileak: Alfonso García Suárez eta Ulises Moulines].
Wright, Jack. 2018. "Rescuing objectivity: a contextualist proposal". Philosophy of the Social Sciences 48 (4): 385-406.
Issue
Section
Artikuluak