Thinking about Values in Science: Ethical versus Political Approaches

Schroeder, S. Andrew

doi:10.1017/can.2020.41

Cited by 22 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This will require an ethical value judgment, that may also involve a political value judgment about how to weigh the competing interests at stake when there is reasonable disagreement about risks. Andrew Schroeder (2020) has shown that being attentive to these different kinds of value judgments may be important for how we resolve these conflicts.…”

Section: Hype and Value Judgements: When Is Exaggeration “Inappropria...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding the Problem of “Hype”: Exaggeration, Values, and Trust in Science

Intemann

2020

Can. J. of Philosophy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several science studies scholars report instances of scientific “hype,” or sensationalized exaggeration, in journal articles, institutional press releases, and science journalism in a variety of fields (e.g., Caulfield and Condit 2012). Yet, how “hype” is being conceived varies. I will argue that hype is best understood as a particular kind of exaggeration, one that explicitly or implicitly exaggerates various positive aspects of science in ways that undermine the goals of science communication in a particular context. This account also makes clear the ways that value judgments play a role in judgments of “hype,” which has implications for detecting and addressing this problem.

show abstract

Section: Hype and Value Judgements: When Is Exaggeration “Inappropria...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding the Problem of “Hype”: Exaggeration, Values, and Trust in Science

Intemann

2020

Can. J. of Philosophy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For the purposes of this paper, we consider it at a basic level that it acknowledges something as worthy, inspires action, and develops personal attitudes. Scientists make a value judgment in the various components of their inquiry cycle, from defining concepts to quantitative measures (Schroeder 2020 ) to scientific communication. These judgments stem beyond looking at evidence and data for decision-making.…”

Section: Finding the High Groundmentioning

confidence: 99%

A whale of a time: engaging in a war of values for youth activism in science education

Gisewhite

2023

Cult Stud of Sci Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Exposure and experience with ethical dilemmas and controversial socioscientific issues provide a link to students’ lives or a pathway for sympathy/empathy and care, where youth use emotion to engage with the scenario and develop critical thinking skills to respond to ethical issues. For this theoretical paper, I focus on how informal science can be used in science classes to provide such exposure and experience, creating spaces for students to foster erotic relationships with the nature-Other and their local environment. More specifically, this paper aims to discuss how educators can use these informal science experiences, and in this case—those involving marine mammals, to find value for natural phenomena through erotic generosity and phenomenological experiences within the environment and use their knowledge and power to act responsibly.

show abstract

“…For the general importance of this distinction and its relevance for work on the value-laden 23 aspects of science, see Schroeder (2020).…”

Section: Refinement #1: Moving From Ethics To Politics 23mentioning

confidence: 99%

An Ethical Framework for Presenting Scientific Results to Policy-Makers

Schroeder¹

2022

Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scientists have the ability to influence policy in important ways through how they present their results. Surprisingly, existing codes of scientific ethics have little to say about such choices. I propose that we can arrive at a set of ethical guidelines to govern scientists' presentation of information to policymakers by looking to bioethics: roughly, just as a clinician should aim to promote informed decision-making by patients, a scientist should aim to promote informed decisionmaking by policymakers. Though this may sound like a natural proposal, I show it offers guidance that conflicts with standard scientific practices. I conclude by considering one cost of the proposal: that it would prevent scientists from acting as advocates in a way that is currently common in certain fields. I accept that the proposal would restrict scientists' political advocacy rights, but argue that the benefits of adopting it -promoting democratic governance -justify the restriction. I. A PUZZLEThe Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries and Risk Factors Study (GBD) is "the single largest and most detailed scientific effort ever conducted to quantify levels and trends in health." More than 2300 researchers from more than 130 countries collect 1 and analyze data on more than 300 diseases and injuries, aiming to put together a comprehensive picture of global health from 1990 to the present. Not surprisingly, its 2 results are widely reported and discussed by scientists, policy-makers, and the public at large. Probably the most high-profile of its results is its summary ranking of the world's largest health problems, ranked by disability-adjusted life years (DALYs): 3A striking thing about this list is the absence of cancer. One might conclude from this that, perhaps contrary to our preconceptions, cancer is not a major global health problem. That, however, would be the wrong lesson to draw. Cancer is a major global health problem. According to the GBD, it was responsible for 213.2 million DALYs in 2016 -far more than ischemic heart disease. Why, then, is it missing from the list? Because the GBD team chose to rank cancers separately by site. Thus, lung cancer ranked 19th, liver cancer 32nd, stomach cancer 36th, and so forth. Adding all cancers together, however, would see them rise to the top. rank Disorder DALYs (millions)

show abstract

Thinking about Values in Science: Ethical versus Political Approaches

Cited by 22 publications

References 24 publications

Understanding the Problem of “Hype”: Exaggeration, Values, and Trust in Science

Understanding the Problem of “Hype”: Exaggeration, Values, and Trust in Science

A whale of a time: engaging in a war of values for youth activism in science education

An Ethical Framework for Presenting Scientific Results to Policy-Makers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About