This essay compares two philosophical proposals concerning the relation between values and science, both of which reject the value-free ideal but nevertheless place restrictions on how values and science should interact. The first of these proposals relies on a distinction between the direct and indirect roles of values, while the second emphasizes instead a distinction between epistemic and nonepistemic values. We consider these two proposals in connection with a case study of disputed research on the topic of environmental justice and argue that the second proposal has several advantages over the first.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/ken.2012.0010 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!