{"title":"Rebuttal to Douglas and Elliott.","authors":"Robert Hudson","doi":"10.1007/s10838-022-09616-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In \"Should We Strive to Make Science Bias‑Free? A Philosophical Assessment of the Reproducibility Crisis\", I argue that the problem of bias in science, a key factor in the current reproducibility crisis, is worsened if we follow Heather Douglas and Kevin C. Elliott's advice and introduce non-epistemic values into the evidential assessment of scientific hypotheses. In their response to my paper, Douglas and Elliott complain that I misrepresent their views and fall victim to various confusions. In this rebuttal I argue, by means of an examination of their published views, that my initial interpretation of their work is accurate and that, in their hands, science is generally prone to deviations from truth.</p>","PeriodicalId":73570,"journal":{"name":"Journal for general philosophy of science = Zeitschrift fur allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie","volume":"53 2","pages":"211-216"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9239931/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal for general philosophy of science = Zeitschrift fur allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10838-022-09616-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/5/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In "Should We Strive to Make Science Bias‑Free? A Philosophical Assessment of the Reproducibility Crisis", I argue that the problem of bias in science, a key factor in the current reproducibility crisis, is worsened if we follow Heather Douglas and Kevin C. Elliott's advice and introduce non-epistemic values into the evidential assessment of scientific hypotheses. In their response to my paper, Douglas and Elliott complain that I misrepresent their views and fall victim to various confusions. In this rebuttal I argue, by means of an examination of their published views, that my initial interpretation of their work is accurate and that, in their hands, science is generally prone to deviations from truth.
在《我们应该努力使科学无偏见吗?对可重复性危机的哲学评估》一文中,我认为如果我们听从希瑟-道格拉斯(Heather Douglas)和凯文-埃利奥特(Kevin C. Elliott)的建议,在科学假说的证据评估中引入非认识论的价值,那么科学中的偏见问题(当前可重复性危机的一个关键因素)就会恶化。道格拉斯和埃利奥特在回应我的论文时,抱怨我歪曲了他们的观点,是各种混淆的受害者。在这篇反驳文章中,我通过对他们发表的观点进行研究,认为我最初对他们工作的解释是准确的,而且在他们手中,科学一般容易偏离真理。