Author:
Mayo Deborah G.,Spanos Aris
Abstract
We argue that a responsible analysis of today's evidence-based risk assessments and risk debates in biology demands a critical or metascientific scrutiny of the uncertainties, assumptions, and threats of error along the manifold steps in risk analysis. Without an accompanying methodological critique, neither sensitivity to social and ethical values, nor conceptual clarification alone, suffices. In this view, restricting the invitation for philosophical involvement to those wearing a “bioethicist” label precludes the vitally important role philosophers of science may be able to play as bioevidentialists. The goal of this paper is to give a brief and partial sketch of how a metascientific scrutiny of risk evidence might work.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
History and Philosophy of Science,Philosophy,History
Reference24 articles.
1. Sociological vs. Metascientific Views of Risk Assessment;Mayo;in Mayo and Hollander,1991
2. Methodology in Practice: Statistical Misspecification Testing
3. Regulating Toxic Substances
Cited by
6 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献