You are not currently logged in.
Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Values in Science beyond Underdetermination and Inductive Risk
Matthew J. Brown
Philosophy of Science
Vol. 80, No. 5 (December 2013), pp. 829-839
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/673720
Page Count: 11
You can always find the topics here!Topics: Empirical evidence, Value judgments, Underdetermination, Judgment, Moral judgment, Objectivity, Argumentation, Error rates, Empiricism, Inference
Were these topics helpful?See something inaccurate? Let us know!
Select the topics that are inaccurate.
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
Proponents of the value ladenness of science rely primarily on arguments from underdetermination or inductive risk, which share the premise that we should only consider values where the evidence runs out or leaves uncertainty; they adopt a criterion of lexical priority of evidence over values. The motivation behind lexical priority is to avoid reaching conclusions on the basis of wishful thinking rather than good evidence. This is a real concern, however, that giving lexical priority to evidential considerations over values is a mistake and unnecessary for avoiding the wishful thinking. Values have a deeper role to play in science.
Copyright 2013 by the Philosophy of Science Association. All rights reserved.