• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Studies in history and philosophy of science >Does environmental science crowd out non-epistemic values?
【24h】

Does environmental science crowd out non-epistemic values?

机译：环境科学是否挤出了非认识价值？

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

While no one denies that science depends on epistemic values, many philosophers of science have wrestled with the appropriate role of non-epistemic values, such as social, ethical, and political values. Recently, philosophers of science have overwhelmingly accepted that non-epistemic values should play a legitimate role in science. The recent philosophical debate has shifted from the value-free ideal in science to questions about how science should incorporate non-epistemic values. This article engages with such questions through an exploration of the environmental sciences. These sciences are a mosaic of diverse fields characterized by interdisciplinarity, problem-orientation, policy-directedness, and ubiquitous nonepistemic values. This article addresses a frequently voiced concern about many environmental science practices: that they & lsquo;crowd out & rsquo; or displace significant non-epistemic values by either (1) entailing some non-epistemic values, rather than others, or by (2) obscuring discussion of non-epistemic values altogether. With three detailed case studies e monetizing nature, nature-society dualism, and ecosystem health e we show that the alleged problem of crowding out emerges from active debates within the environmental sciences. In each case, critics charge that the scientific practice in question displaces nonepistemic values in at least one of the two senses distinguished above. We show that crowding out is neither necessary nor always harmful when it occurs. However, we do see these putative objections to the application of environmental science as teaching valuable lessons about what matters for successful environmental science, all things considered. Given the significant role that many environmental scientists see for non-epistemic values in their fields, we argue that these cases motivate lessons about the importance of value-flexibility (that practices can accommodate a plurality of non-epistemic values), transparency about value-based decisions that inform practice, and environmental pragmatism.(c) 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
机译：虽然没有人否认科学取决于认知价值，但许多科学哲学家都扭伤了非认识价值观的适当作用，例如社会，道德和政治价值观。最近，科学的哲学家已经绝大地接受了非认识的价值观应该在科学中发挥合理作用。最近的哲学辩论已经从科学的无价值理想转向了关于科学如何纳入非认识价值的问题。本文通过探索环境科学与此类问题进行了处理。这些科学是由跨学科，问题定向，政策导向和无处不在的非本体价值观的各种领域的马赛克。本文讨论了对许多环境科学实践的常见问题：他们＆lsquo;人群出来＆rsquo;或者通过（1）持有一些不认知价值，而不是其他人，或者（2）完全模糊讨论非认知价值的讨论，或者夸大了（1）。有三个详细的案例研究e货币化自然，自然 - 社会双向和生态系统健康展示我们展示了涉嫌挤出的问题从环境科学内的积极辩论中出现。在每种情况下，批评者指控的科学实践在以上区分的两个感官中的至少一个中取代了非本体值。我们表明挤出既不是必要的，也不是危害它。但是，我们确实看到了这些推崇对环境科学的应用作为教学有关成功环境科学至关重要的宝贵教训，所有考虑的事情。鉴于许多环境科学家在其领域看到非认识价值的重要作用，我们认为这些情况有关于价值灵活性的重要性的课程（该实践可以容纳多个非认知值），关于价值的透明度 - 以信息为基础的决定，可通知实践和环境实用主义。（c）2021 Elsevier Ltd.保留所有权利。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号