Philosophical Scrutiny of Evidence of Risks: From Bioethics to Bioevidence.
We argue that a responsible analysis of today's evidence-based risk assessments and risk debates in biology demands a critical or metascientific scrutiny of the uncertainties, assumptions, and threats of error along the manifold steps in risk analysis. Without an accompanying methodological critique...
| Publicado en: | Philosophy of Science Vol. 73; no. 5; pp. 803 - 817 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Cambridge University Press
Dec2006
|
| 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=27159514&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 27159514 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 00318248 PSC jtl: Philosophy of Science issn: 00318248 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Dec2006 vid: 73 iid: 5 pid: 15979 pub: Cambridge University Press artinfo: ui: 27159514 10.1086/518630 ppf: 803 ppct: 14 formats: fmt: @attributes: type: P size: 854KB tig: atl: Philosophical Scrutiny of Evidence of Risks: From Bioethics to Bioevidence. aug: au: Mayo, Deborah G. Spanos, Aris affil: Department of Philosophy, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 24061 Department of Economics, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 24061 su: Risk assessment Bioethics Evidence Scientific method Hormesis sug: subj: Risk assessment Bioethics Evidence Scientific method Hormesis ab: We argue that a responsible analysis of today's evidence-based risk assessments and risk debates in biology demands a critical or metascientific scrutiny of the uncertainties, assumptions, and threats of error along the manifold steps in risk analysis. Without an accompanying methodological critique, neither sensitivity to social and ethical values, nor conceptual clarification alone, suffices. In this view, restricting the invitation for philosophical involvement to those wearing a "bioethicist" label precludes the vitally important role philosophers of science may be able to play as bioevidentialists. The goal of this paper is to give a brief and partial sketch of how a metascientific scrutiny of risk evidence might work. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Copyright of Philosophy of Science is the property of Cambridge University Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. item: Philosophy of Science holder: Cambridge University Press dt: @attributes: year: 2006 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|