State of the field: Transient underdetermination and values in science

Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A

Volumn 44, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 124-133

  Biddle, Justin ^a  

^a GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

Science and values; Transient underdetermination

Indexed keywords

EID: 84873717314     PISSN: 00393681     EISSN: 18792510     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.shpsa.2012.09.003     Document Type: Review

References (56)

1. Biddle J. Lessons from the Vioxx debacle: What the privatization of science can teach us about social epistemology. Social Epistemology 2007, 21(1):21-39.
2. Biddle J. Advocates or unencumbered selves? On the role of Mill's political liberalism in Longino's contextual empiricism. Philosophy of Science 2009, 76:612-623.
3. Biddle J., Winsberg E. Value judgements and the estimation of uncertainty in climate modeling. New waves in philosophy of science 2010, 172-197. Palgrave MacMillan, Basingstoke, Hampshire. P.D. Magnus, J. Busch (Eds.).
4. Brown J.R. The community of science®. The challenge of the social and the pressure of practice: Science and values revisited 2008, 189-216. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh. M. Carrier, D.A. Howard, J. Kourany (Eds.).
5. Collins H. Stages in the empirical programme of relativism. Social Studies of Science 1981, 11:3-10.
6. Collins H., Evans R. Rethinking expertise 2007, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
7. Douglas H. Inductive risk and values in science. Philosophy of Science 2000, 67:559-579.
8. Douglas H. Science, policy, and the value-free ideal 2009, University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh.
9. Duhem, P. (1954 [1906]). The aim and structure of physical theory. Princeton: Princeton University Press. (Translation of La théorie physique: Son objet, sa structure. Paris: Marcel Rivière & Cie, 1906.).
10. Dupré J. Fact and value. Value-free science? Ideals and illusions 2007, 21-41. Oxford University Press, Oxford. H. Kincaid, J. Dupré, A. Wylie (Eds.).
11. Elliott K. Direct and indirect roles for values in science. Philosophy of Science 2011, 78:303-324.
12. Elliott K. Is a little pollution good for you? Incorporating societal values in environmental research 2011, Oxford University Press, New York.
13. Feyerabend P. Consolations for the specialist. Criticism and the growth of knowledge 1970, 197-230. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. I. Lakatos, A. Musgrave (Eds.).
14. Frank P.G. The variety of reasons for the acceptance of scientific theories. Validation of scientific theories 1954, 3-17. Idem, Beacon Press, Boston.
15. Giere R.N. A new program for philosophy of science?. Philosophy of Science 2003, 70:15-21.
16. Howard D.A. Better red than dead-Putting an end to the social irrelevance of postwar philosophy of science. Science and Education 2009, 18:199-220.
17. Howard D.A. Two left turns make a right: On the curious political career of North American philosophy of science at midcentury" Logical Empiricism in North America 2003, 25-93. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis. G. Hardcastle, A. Richardson (Eds.).
18. Howard D.A. Lost wanderers in the forest of knowledge: Some thoughts on the discovery-justification distinction. Revisiting discovery and justification: Historical and philosophical perspectives on the context distinction 2006, 3-22. Springer, Dordrecht. J. Schickore, F. Steinle (Eds.).
19. Jeffrey R.C. Valuation and acceptance of scientific hypotheses. Philosophy of Science 1956, 22:237-246.
20. Kitcher P. Science, truth, and democracy 2001, Oxford University Press, New York.
21. Kitcher P. Science in a democratic society 2011, Oxford University Press, New York.
22. Koertge N. Science, values, and the value of science. Philosophy of Science 2000, 67:S45-S57.
23. Koertge N. Feminist values and the value of science. Scrutinizing feminist epistemology: An examination of gender in science 2003, 222-233. Rutgers University Press, Rutgers, NJ. C. Pinnick, N. Koertge, R. Alemander (Eds.).
24. Kourany J. A philosophy of science for the twenty-first century. Philosophy of Science 2003, 70:1-14.
25. Kourany J. Reply to Giere. Philosophy of Science 2003, 70:22-26.
26. Kourany J. Philosophy of science after feminism 2010, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
27. Kuhn T.S. The structure of scientific revolutions 1962, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
28. Kuhn T.S. Objectivity, value judgment, and theory choice. Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change 1977, 320-339. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. T. Essential (Ed.).
29. Lakatos I. Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programs. Criticism and the growth of knowledge 1970, 91-196. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. I. Lakatos, A. Musgrave (Eds.).
30. Laudan L. Science and values 1984, University of California Press, Berkeley.
31. Laudan L., Leplin J. Empirical equivalence and underdetermination. Journal of Philosophy 1991, 88:449-472.
32. Longino H. Science as social knowledge: Values and objectivity in scientific inquiry 1990, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
33. Longino H. The fate of knowledge 2002, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
34. Longino H. Cognitive and non-cognitive values in science: Rethinking the dichotomy. Feminism, science, and the philosophy of science 1996, 39-58. Kluwer, Dordrecht. L.H. Nelson, J. Nelson (Eds.).
35. McMullin E. Values in science. PSA 1982 1983, Vol. 2:3-28. Philosophy of Science Association, East Lansing, Michigan.
36. Mitchell S.D. The prescribed and proscribed values in science policy. Science, values, and objectivity 2004, 245-255. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh. P. Machamer, G. Wolters (Eds.).
37. Nelson L.H. Who knows? From Quine to feminist empiricism 1990, Temple University Press, Philadelphia.
38. Neurath, O. (1983 [1913]). The lost wanderers of Descartes and the auxiliary motive (on the psychology of decision). In R. S. Cohen, & M. Neurath (Eds.), Philosophical Papers 1913-1946 (pp. 1-12). Dordrecht: Reidel. (Translation of Die Verirrten des Cartesius und das Auxiliarmotiv. Zur Psychologie des Entschlusses. Jahrbuch der Philosophischen Gesellschaft an der Universität Wien 1913 (pp. 45-59). Leipzig: Johann Ambrosius Barth).
39. Norton J.D. Must evidence underdetermine theory?. The challenge of the social and the pressure of practice: Science and values revisited 2008, 17-44. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh. M. Carrier, D.A. Howard, J. Kourany (Eds.).
40. Okruhlik K. Gender and the biological sciences. Biology and Society 1994, 20:21-42.
41. Pinnick C. Feminist philosophy: Implications for feminist philosophy of science. Scrutinizing feminist epistemology: An examination of gender in science 2003, 20-30. Rutgers University Press, Rutgers, NJ. C. Pinnick, N. Koertge, R. Alemander (Eds.).
42. Popper, K. (1959 [1934]). The logic of scientific discovery. London: Hutchinson. (Translation of Logik der Forschung. Tübingen: Mohr.).
43. Potter E. Underdetermination undeterred. Feminism, science, and the philosophy of science 1997, 121-138. Kluwer, Dordrecht. L.H. Nelson, J. Nelson (Eds.).
44. Quine W.V.O. Two dogmas of empiricism. Philosophical Review 1951, 60:20-43.
45. Quine W.V.O., Ullian J.S. The web of belief 1970, Random House, New York.
46. Reichenbach H. Experience and prediction 1938, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
47. Reisch G. How the cold war transformed philosophy of science. To the icy slopes of logic 2005, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
48. Rolin K. Is 'science as social' a feminist insight?. Social Epistemology 2002, 16:243-249.
49. Rooney P. On values in science. Is the epistemic/non-epistemic distinction useful?. PSA 1992 1992, Vol. 2:13-22. Philosophy of Science Association, East Lansing.
50. Rudner R. The scientist qua scientist makes value judgments. Philosophy of Science 1953, 20(1):1-6.
51. Ruphy S. 'Empiricism all the way down': A defense of the value neutrality of science in response to Helen Longino's contextual empiricism. Perspectives on Science 2006, 14:189-213.
52. Ruse M. Evolutionary biology and the question of trust. Scientific values and civic virtues 2005, 99-119. Oxford University Press, New York. N. Koertge (Ed.).
53. Salmon W. Rationality and objectivity in science, or Tom Kuhn meets Tom Bayes. Scientific theories: Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science, XIV 1990, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN. C.W. Savage (Ed.).
54. Solomon M. Social empiricism 2001, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
55. Wilholt T. Bias and values in scientific research. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 2009, 40:92-101.
56. Wray K.B. A defense of Longino's social epistemology. Philosophy of Science 1999, 66:538-552.