Epistemic Standards for Participatory Technology Assessment: Suggestions Based Upon Well-Ordered Science.
When one wants to use citizen input to inform policy, what should the standards of informedness on the part of the citizens be? While there are moral reasons to allow every citizen to participate and have a voice on every issue, regardless of education and involvement, designers of participatory ass...
| Publicado en: | Science & Engineering Ethics Vol. 26; no. 3; pp. 1709 - 1742 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Springer Nature
Jun2020
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=143699909&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 143699909 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 13533452 GNI jtl: Science & Engineering Ethics issn: 13533452 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Jun2020 vid: 26 iid: 3 pid: 237 pub: Springer Nature artinfo: ui: 143699909 10.1007/s11948-020-00211-7 ppf: 1709 ppct: 33 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P size: 762KB tig: atl: Epistemic Standards for Participatory Technology Assessment: Suggestions Based Upon Well-Ordered Science. aug: au: Durán, Juan M. Pirtle, Zachary affil: Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management, TU Delft, Building 31 – B 4.310 - Jaffalaan 5, 2628 BX, Delft, The Netherlands NASA Headquarters, 300 E Street SW, 20024, Washington, DC, USA su: Kitcher, Philip, 1947- United States. National Aeronautics & Space Administration Technology assessment Moral reasoning Vignettes Scientific community Decision making Deliberation sug: subj: Kitcher, Philip, 1947- United States. National Aeronautics & Space Administration Technology assessment Moral reasoning Vignettes Scientific community Decision making Deliberation keyword: NASA expert and citizen assessment of science and technology Participatory technology assessment Science policy Well-Ordered Science ab: When one wants to use citizen input to inform policy, what should the standards of informedness on the part of the citizens be? While there are moral reasons to allow every citizen to participate and have a voice on every issue, regardless of education and involvement, designers of participatory assessments have to make decisions about how to structure deliberations as well as how much background information and deliberation time to provide to participants. After assessing different frameworks for the relationship between science and society, we use Philip Kitcher's framework of Well-Ordered Science to propose an epistemic standard on how citizen deliberations should be structured. We explore what potential standards follow from this epistemic framework focusing on significance versus scientific and engineering expertise. We argue that citizens should be tutored on the historical context of why scientific questions became significant and deemed scientifically and socially valuable, and if citizens report that they are capable of weighing in on an issue then they should be able to do so. We explore what this standard can mean by looking at actual citizen deliberations tied to the 2014 NASA ECAST Asteroid Initiative Citizen forums. We code different vignettes of citizens debating alternative approaches for Mars exploration based upon what level of information seemed to be sufficient for them to feel comfortable in making a policy position. The analysis provides recommendations on how to design and assess future citizen assessments grounded in properly conveying the historical value context surrounding a scientific issue and trusting citizens to seek out sufficient information to deliberate. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Science & Engineering Ethics is a copyright of Springer, 2020. All Rights Reserved. item: Science & Engineering Ethics holder: Springer Nature dt: @attributes: year: 2020 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|