ABOUT THIS EPISODE
Over the past two decades, our view of the ideals for science in society has changed. Discussions of the roles for values in science and changes in the views on the responsibilities in science have shifted the understanding of science from ideally value-free to properly value-laden. This shift, however, seems to remove a key difference between science and politics, as now both science and politics are value-laden, and disputes in both can arise from value disagreements. If science is not value-free (nor should it be), what differentiates science from politics? Heather Douglas lays out norms for scientific inquiry that make it distinct in practice from politics and argues that understanding and defending these differences help to protect science from abuses of power.
Heather Douglas is a philosopher of science who works on the relationships among science, values, and democratic publics. She is an Associate Professor in the Department of Philosophy at Michigan State University, Senior Visiting Fellow at the Center for Philosophy of Science at the University of Pittsburgh (2021-2022), and a AAAS fellow. She is the author of "Science, Policy, and the Value-Free Ideal" (2009), "The Rightful Place of Science: Science, Values, and Democracy" (2021), and editor of the book series "Science, Values, and the Public" for University of Pittsburgh Press.
Justyna Bandola-Gill, a Research Fellow at the University of Edinburgh, offers a response.
