- New
-
Topics
- All Categories
- Metaphysics and Epistemology
- Value Theory
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Logic and Philosophy of Logic
- Philosophy of Biology
- Philosophy of Cognitive Science
- Philosophy of Computing and Information
- Philosophy of Mathematics
- Philosophy of Physical Science
- Philosophy of Social Science
- Philosophy of Probability
- General Philosophy of Science
- Philosophy of Science, Misc
- History of Western Philosophy
- Philosophical Traditions
- Philosophy, Misc
- Other Academic Areas
- Journals
- Submit material
- More
Expert Communication and the Self-Defeating Codes of Scientific Ethics
American Journal of Bioethics 21 (1):24-26 (2021)
Abstract
Codes of ethics currently offer no guidance to scientists acting in capacity of expert. Yet communicating their expertise is one of the most important activities of scientists. Here I argue that expert communication has a specifically ethical dimension, and that experts must face a fundamental trade-off between "actionability" and "transparency" when communicating. Some recommendations for expert communication are suggested.Author's Profile
Other Versions
No versions found
My notes
Similar books and articles
Expert Trespassing Testimony and the Ethics of Science Communication.Mikkel Gerken - 2018 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 49 (3):299-318.
Guest editorial: Reclaiming the integrity of science in expert witnessing.Bruce D. Sales & Daniel W. Shuman - 1993 - Ethics and Behavior 3 (3 & 4):223 – 229.
'Trust us... we're doctors': Science, media, and ethics in the Hwang stem cell controversy.Robert Sparrow - 2006 - Journal of Communication Research 43 (1):5-24.
Moral Expertise: New Essays from Theoretical and Clinical Perspectives.Jonathan Matheson, Nathan Nobis & Scott McElreath - 2018 - In Jonathan Matheson, Nathan Nobis & Scott McElreath (eds.), Moral Experts, Deference & Disagreement. Springer.
Assertion and Expertise.Jennifer Lackey - 2016 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 92 (2):509-517.
Expertise, disagreement, and trust in vaccine science and policy. The importance of transparency in a world of experts.Alberto Giubilini, Rachel Gur-Arie & Euzebiusz Jamrozik - 2022 - Diametros:1-21.
Believing to Belong: Addressing the Novice-Expert Problem in Polarized Scientific Communication.Helen De Cruz - 2020 - Social Epistemology 34 (5):440-452.
Whom to trust? Public concerns, late modern risks, and expert trustworthiness.Geert Munnichs - 2004 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 17 (2):113-130.
Analytics
Added to PP
2020-12-30
Downloads
465 (#60,033)
6 months
120 (#43,705)
2020-12-30
Downloads
465 (#60,033)
6 months
120 (#43,705)
Historical graph of downloads
Author's Profile
Citations of this work
Precision Medicine, Data, and the Anthropology of Social Status.Hugh Desmond - 2021 - American Journal of Bioethics 21 (4):80-83.
Trust and professionalism in science: medical codes as a model for scientific negligence?Hugh Desmond & Kris Dierickx - 2021 - BMC Medical Ethics 22 (1):1-11.
The Fragility of Scientific Rigour and Integrity in “Sped up Science”: Research Misconduct, Bias, and Hype and in the COVID-19 Pandemic.W. Lipworth, I. Kerridge, C. Stewart, D. Silva & R. Upshur - 2023 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 20 (4):607-616.
References found in this work
Professionalism in Science: Competence, Autonomy, and Service.Hugh Desmond - 2020 - Science and Engineering Ethics 26 (3):1287-1313.
Self-Defeating Codes of Medical Ethics and How to Fix Them: Failures in COVID-19 Response and Beyond.Alex John London - 2021 - American Journal of Bioethics 21 (1):4-13.
PhilPapers logo by Andrea Andrews and Meghan Driscoll.
This site uses cookies and Google Analytics (see our terms & conditions for details regarding the privacy implications). Use of this site is subject to terms & conditions.
All rights reserved by The PhilPapers Foundation
Server: philpapers-web-6b8b7fc7ff-fv7ld uwo