Evaluating science on epistemic and moral grounds (formerly, putting anthropomorphism in context)

Abstract

In recent years several philosophers of biology have proposed a pluralistic approach to science. In The Disorder of Things, John Dupré argues for a version of pluralism. Pluralists of all breeds must deal with a familiar class of worries that are routinely expressed at the suggestion of any move away from monism. One such worry is that pluralism is a relativistic position in which "anything goes" in science. In this paper I examine Dupré's proposals for saving his pluralism from the much-feared overly permissive relativism. I use a case study to exhibit the types of standards, both epistemic and moral, Dupré suggests we use to judge a scientific idea. This case study illustrates Dupré's proposals in the context of the debate surrounding the use of anthropomorphic language in sociobiological accounts of rape. This paper has three goals. First, it aims to explain and illustrate Dupré's method for distinguishing good science from bad science. Second, it attempts to show that anthropomorphism's problems extend beyond concerns about its epistemic credentials. Third, it defends Dupré's mode of evaluation against some pressing objections.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

    This entry is not archived by us. If you are the author and have permission from the publisher, we recommend that you archive it. Many publishers automatically grant permission to authors to archive pre-prints. By uploading a copy of your work, you will enable us to better index it, making it easier to find.

    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 102,190

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

Promiscuous Realism.Robert A. Wilson - 1996 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 47 (2):303-316.
Biological explanations, realism, ontology, and categories.Matthew J. Barker - 2013 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 44 (4):617-622.
Probabilistic causality: Reply to John dupré.Ellery Eells - 1987 - Philosophy of Science 54 (1):105-114.
Scientific Progress and Democratic Society through the Lens of Scientific Pluralism.Theptawee Chokvasin - 2023 - Suranaree Journal of Social Science 17 (2):Article ID e268392 (pp. 1-15).
How pluralistic is pluralism really? A case study of Sandra Mitchell’s Integrative Pluralism.Ragnar Van der Merwe - 2023 - Theoria: Revista de Teoría, Historia y Fundamentos de la Ciencia 38 (3):319-338.
Pluralistic physicalism and the causal exclusion argument.Markus I. Eronen - 2012 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 2 (2):219-232.
Epistemic relativism, scepticism, pluralism.Martin Kusch - 2017 - Synthese 194 (12):4687-4703.
Imperialism, Progress, Developmental Teleology, and Interdisciplinary Unification.Steve Clarke & Adrian Walsh - 2013 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 27 (3):341-351.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
37 (#623,047)

6 months
13 (#274,692)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Karen Frost-Arnold
Hobart and William Smith Colleges

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references