VII—Internal and external validity in thought experiments

Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society

Volumn 116, Issue 2, 2016, Pages 127-152

  Wilson, James ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85012277770     PISSN: 00667374     EISSN: 14679264     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/arisoc/aow008     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Balconi, Margherita, Stefano Brusoni, and Luigi Orsenigo 2010: ‘In Defence of the Linear Model: An Essay’. Research Policy, 39(1), pp. 1-13.
2. Bauman, Christopher W., A. Peter McGraw, Daniel M. Bartels, and Caleb Warren 2014: ‘Revisiting External Validity: Concerns about Trolley Problems and Other Sacrificial Dilemmas in Moral Psychology’. Social and Personality Psychology Compass. 8(9), pp. 536-54.
3. Becker, Howard S. 2007: Telling About Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
4. Bush, Vannevar 1945: Science: The Endless Frontier. Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office.
5. Cartwright, Nancy 2007: ‘Are RCTs the Gold Standard?’ BioSocieties, 2(1), pp. 11-20.
6. Cartwright, Nancy 2013: ‘Knowing What We Are Talking About: Why Evidence Doesn’t Always Travel’. Evidence and Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice, 9(1), pp. 97-112.
7. Cartwright, Nancy and Jeremy Hardie 2012: Evidence-Based Policy: A Practical Guide to Doing It Better. New York: Oxford University Press.
8. Cohen, G. A. 2009: Rescuing Justice and Equality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
9. Dancy, Jonathan 1985: ‘The Role of Imaginary Cases in Ethics’. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 66(1-2), pp. 141-53.
10. Elgin, Catherine 2014: ‘Fiction as Thought Experiment’. Perspectives on Science, 22(2), pp. 221-41.
11. Elster, Jakob 2011: ‘How Outlandish Can Imaginary Cases Be?’ Journal of Applied Philosophy, 28(3), pp. 241-58.
12. Foot, Philippa 1967: ‘The Problem of Abortion and the Doctrine of Double Effect’. Oxford Review, 5, pp. 5-15.
13. Frick, Johann 2015: ‘Contractualism and Social Risk’. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 43(3), pp. 175-223.
14. Fried, Barbara H. 2012a: ‘Can Contractualism Save Us from Aggregation?’ Journal of Ethics, 16(1), pp. 39-66.
15. Fried, Barbara H. 2012b: ‘What Does Matter? The Case for Killing the Trolley Problem (or Letting It Die)’. Philosophical Quarterly, 62, pp. 505-29.
16. Godin, Benôıt 2006: ‘The Linear Model of Innovation: The Historical Construction of an Analytical Framework’. Science, Technology and Human Values, 31(6), pp. 39-667.
17. Kagan, Shelly 1988: ‘The Additive Fallacy’. Ethics, 99(1), pp. 5-31.
18. Kamm, F. M. 1993: Morality, Mortality, Volume I: Death and Whom to Save from It. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
19. Kamm, F. M. 1996: Morality, Mortality, Volume II: Rights, Duties, and Status. New York: Oxford University Press.
20. Kamm, F. M. 2006: Intricate Ethics: Rights, Responsibilities, and Permissible Harm. New York: Oxford University Press.
21. Kline, Stephen, and Nathan Rosenberg 1986: ‘An Overview of Innovation’. In Ralph Landau and Nathan Rosenberg (eds.), The Positive Sum Strategy: Harnessing Technology for Economic Growth, pp. 275-306. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
22. Nozick, Robert 1975: Anarchy, State, and Utopia. New York: Basic Books.
23. Pashler, Harold, and Eric-Jan Wagenmakers 2012: ‘Editors’ Introduction to the Special Section on Replicability in Psychological Science: A Crisis of Confidence?’ Perspectives on Psychological Science. 7(6), pp. 528-30.
24. Rachels, James 1975: ‘Active and Passive Euthanasia’. New England Journal of Medicine, 292(2), pp. 78-80.
25. Rawls, John 1993: Political Liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press.
26. Ricoeur, Paul 1998: Critique and Conviction: Conversations with François Azouvi and Marc de Launay. Oxford: Polity Press.
27. Rothwell, Peter 2005: ‘External Validity of Randomised Controlled Trials: “To whom do the results of this trial apply?”’. Lancet, 365, pp. 82-93.
28. Scanlon, T. M. 2003: ‘Rawls on Justification’. In Samuel Freeman (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Rawls, pp. 139-67. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
29. Schwitzgebel, Eric, and Fiery Cushman 2015: ‘Philosophers’ Biased Judgments Persist Despite Training, Expertise and Reflection’. Cognition, 141, pp. 127-37.
30. Singer, Peter 1972: ‘Famine, Affluence, and Morality’. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 1(3), pp. 229-43.
31. Smart, J. J. C., and Bernard Williams 1973: Utilitarianism: For and Against. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
32. Sorensen, Roy A. 1992: Thought Experiments. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
33. Stodden, Victoria 2014: ‘Enabling Reproducibility in Big Data Research: Balancing Confidentiality and Scientific Transparency’. In Julia Lane, Victoria Stodden, Stefan Bender and Helen Nissenbaum (eds.), Privacy, Big Data and the Public Good: Frameworks for Engagement, pp. 112-32. New York: Cambridge University Press.
34. Thacher, David 2006: ‘The Normative Case Study’. American Journal of Sociology, 111(6), pp. 1631-76.
35. Thomson, Judith Jarvis 1976: ‘Killing, Letting Die, and the Trolley Problem’. Monist, 59(2), pp. 204-17.
36. Unger, Peter 1996: Living High and Letting Die: Our Illusion of Innocence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
37. Voorhoeve, Alex (ed.) 2009: Conversations on Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
38. Wilson, James 2009: ‘Towards a Normative Framework for Public Health Ethics and Policy’. Public Health Ethics, 2(2), pp. 184-94.
39. Wilson, James 2014: ‘Embracing Complexity: Theory, Cases and the Future of Bioethics’. Monash Bioethics Review, 32(1-2), pp. 3-21.