科学中的管理价值:回归决策理论。

IF 2 4区 哲学 Q3 ETHICS
Eric Winsberg
{"title":"科学中的管理价值:回归决策理论。","authors":"Eric Winsberg","doi":"10.1353/ken.2024.a965814","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>There are many proposals in the literature on how to \"manage values.\" Many of these proposals have in common the assumption that the relevant values in science can be \"packaged for transfer\": they can be put in an envelope for scientists to hand to stakeholders or policymakers, or for members of the public or ethical experts to hand to scientists. The central aim of this paper is to argue that packaging values for transfer is a practical impossibility. The central argument of the paper concerns the best stance to take on how values in science should be conceptualized. Specifically, I argue that we need to return to a decision-theoretic definition of values (as, I argue, is strongly suggested by a close reading of Rudner, Jeffrey, and Hempel.) Further, I argue for a picture of these values that is nonpsychologistic, stance relative, and always and everywhere entangled with credences. I call my account of the nature of values in science the Putnam-Hempel account. Unfortunately, the Putnam-Hempel account forces us to see that any proposal that depends on packaging values for transfer will ultimately suffer from great difficulties.</p>","PeriodicalId":46167,"journal":{"name":"Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal","volume":"34 4","pages":"389-418"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Managing Values in Science: A Return to Decision Theory.\",\"authors\":\"Eric Winsberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/ken.2024.a965814\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>There are many proposals in the literature on how to \\\"manage values.\\\" Many of these proposals have in common the assumption that the relevant values in science can be \\\"packaged for transfer\\\": they can be put in an envelope for scientists to hand to stakeholders or policymakers, or for members of the public or ethical experts to hand to scientists. The central aim of this paper is to argue that packaging values for transfer is a practical impossibility. The central argument of the paper concerns the best stance to take on how values in science should be conceptualized. Specifically, I argue that we need to return to a decision-theoretic definition of values (as, I argue, is strongly suggested by a close reading of Rudner, Jeffrey, and Hempel.) Further, I argue for a picture of these values that is nonpsychologistic, stance relative, and always and everywhere entangled with credences. I call my account of the nature of values in science the Putnam-Hempel account. Unfortunately, the Putnam-Hempel account forces us to see that any proposal that depends on packaging values for transfer will ultimately suffer from great difficulties.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46167,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal\",\"volume\":\"34 4\",\"pages\":\"389-418\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/ken.2024.a965814\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ken.2024.a965814","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

关于如何“管理价值观”,文献中有很多建议。这些建议中的许多都有一个共同的假设,即科学中的相关价值可以“打包以供转移”:它们可以放在一个信封里,由科学家交给利益相关者或决策者,或者由公众或伦理专家交给科学家。本文的中心目的是论证包装价值的转移在实践上是不可能的。本文的中心论点是关于如何将科学价值概念化的最佳立场。具体来说,我认为我们需要回到价值的决策理论定义(我认为,仔细阅读Rudner、Jeffrey和Hempel的作品强烈建议这样做)。此外,我认为这些价值观应该是非心理的,立场相对的,并且总是和任何地方都与凭证纠缠在一起。我把我对科学中价值本质的解释称为普特南-亨佩尔解释。不幸的是,普特南-亨佩尔的解释迫使我们看到,任何依赖包装价值进行转移的提议最终都将面临巨大的困难。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Managing Values in Science: A Return to Decision Theory.

There are many proposals in the literature on how to "manage values." Many of these proposals have in common the assumption that the relevant values in science can be "packaged for transfer": they can be put in an envelope for scientists to hand to stakeholders or policymakers, or for members of the public or ethical experts to hand to scientists. The central aim of this paper is to argue that packaging values for transfer is a practical impossibility. The central argument of the paper concerns the best stance to take on how values in science should be conceptualized. Specifically, I argue that we need to return to a decision-theoretic definition of values (as, I argue, is strongly suggested by a close reading of Rudner, Jeffrey, and Hempel.) Further, I argue for a picture of these values that is nonpsychologistic, stance relative, and always and everywhere entangled with credences. I call my account of the nature of values in science the Putnam-Hempel account. Unfortunately, the Putnam-Hempel account forces us to see that any proposal that depends on packaging values for transfer will ultimately suffer from great difficulties.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
期刊介绍: The Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal offers a scholarly forum for diverse views on major issues in bioethics, such as analysis and critique of principlism, feminist perspectives in bioethics, the work of the Advisory Committee on Human Radiation Experiments, active euthanasia, genetics, health care reform, and organ transplantation. Each issue includes "Scope Notes," an overview and extensive annotated bibliography on a specific topic in bioethics, and "Bioethics Inside the Beltway," a report written by a Washington insider updating bioethics activities on the federal level.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信