Science, Truth, and Democracy. Philip Kitcher. Abstract. What should be the goal of science in a democratic society? Some say, to attain the truth; others deny. Kitcher, Philip, Science, Truth, and Democracy (Oxford Studies in the Philos- Because science policy has been relatively shielded from open democratic. Striving to boldly redirect the philosophy of science, this book by renowned philosopher Philip Kitcher examines the heated debate surrounding the role of.
|Published (Last):||5 February 2018|
|PDF File Size:||8.59 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||5.28 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Kitcher does cite Douglas a few pages later on a related point.
Whether a claim is “true enough” depends on standards having to do with precision and accuracy — how close the results are to the truth, and how likely the procedure is mitcher generate truth. It is a lucid book that should appeal to a wide public interested in current debates about science–from its philosophical status to its policy implications in the age of genomics.
One serious problem with the book is that it is profoundly disengaged. Philosophy of Science67 4: The book’s answer is that the search for truth should be combined with a respect for democracy. Ethical conclusions should be accepted if and only if they would be endorsed by an ideal conversation: Heidi Grasswick – – Synthese 3: Like its predecessor, Science in a Democratic Society is a landmark work merely in virtue of its existence, over and above its quality and original contributions.
We need agnosticism all the way down. InScience, Truth, and Democracy helped legitimate the philosophical study of the aims of science along ethical, social, democrac political lines, as well as the search for the proper structure of science in a democracy.
Philip Kitcher, “Science, Truth, and Democracy”
The same relations hold between cognitive and probative values. Science in a Democratic Society. Defenders of value-free science may admit that the choice to follow kiitcher research project rather than another is value-laden, and though historically there has been opposition to the idea of sicence direction of scientific research, in the end it does not get at the heart of scientific practice, which could remain value-neutral.
Yet how should that judgement be made? It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, trut education by publishing worldwide. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N. The “losers” in a scientific controversy may be at fault because of the poverty of their scheme of values rather than the poor epistemic quality of their representations.
Controversial, powerful, yet engaging, this volume will appeal to a wide range of readers.