Abstract

There has been a long debate about values and science. Especially about the appropriateness of the value-free ideal. The impact of values on science is crucial if science is to maintain its credibility as an undisputed source of knowledge. In this work, I analyze the impact of values in science based on a work by Heather Douglas and try to clarify the difference between epistemic and non-epistemic values and the relevance of the value-free ideal. My conclusion is that Douglas' claims about the inappropriateness of the value-free ideal do not hold and should be rejected. I propose instead a reformulation of the value-free ideal based on the justification of knowledge.