Frost-Arnold, Karen Louise (Author)
***** I argue that trust is epistemically important because it is the foundation of social practices that confer significant epistemic benefits on scientific communities. I begin by showing the limitations of the dominant rational choice account of trust, which maintains that trust is rational when the truster has good reason to believe that it is in the trusted's self-interest to act trustworthily. These limitations motivate my alternative account of trust, which recognizes non-self-interested motivations for acting trustworthily, such as having a sense of duty. The first part of the account captures the cognitive aspect of trust. When we trust, we take a particular cognitive attitude towards the claim that the trusted will do what we expect her to do; I argue that this cognitive attitude can be either belief or acceptance, in the sense outlined by Michael Bratman. The second part of my account captures the emotional and moral aspects of trust by providing a framework to understand the connection between trust and betrayal--the feeling that usually results from being let down by a person one trusts. I provide an account of betrayal as a reactive emotion that connects it to beliefs about relational obligations. Thus when we trust, we depend on the trusted because we believe that our relationship with the trusted morally obliges her to act as expected. Using this account of trust, I argue that scientific communities can garner significant epistemic benefits when scientists are trustworthy and when they trust each other. Applying a framework adapted from Alvin Goldman's work on social epistemology, I argue that trust fosters epistemically beneficial sharing between scientists. These arguments are supported by a case study of the role that trust played in the achievements made by the community of early 20 th Century Drosophilists. Finally, using recent examples of scientific fraud in cloning research and public policy responses to much-publicized 'crises in trust', I argue that the epistemic success of science results, in part, from science's ability to balance competition and cooperation, trust and distrust, self-interest and other-interest. *****
...MoreDescription Cited in Diss. Abstr. Int. A 69/11 (2009). Pub. no. AAT 3335751.
Article
H. Otto Sibum;
(2020)
When is enough enough? Accurate measurement and the integrity of scientific research
(/isis/citation/CBB773125013/)
Article
Siemsen, Hayo;
(2010)
The Mach-Planck Debate Revisited: Democratization of Science or Elite Knowledge?
(/isis/citation/CBB001034670/)
Book
Finnegan, Ruth H.;
(2005)
Participating in the Knowledge Society: Researchers beyond the University Walls
(/isis/citation/CBB001022827/)
Article
Kidd, Ian James;
(2014)
Was Sir William Crookes Epistemically Virtuous?
(/isis/citation/CBB001421656/)
Article
James W. McAllister;
(2015)
Rhetoric of Effortlessness in Science
(/isis/citation/CBB895482233/)
Article
Ayça Fackler;
(2021)
When Science Denial Meets Epistemic Understanding
(/isis/citation/CBB538668203/)
Article
Forbes, Curtis;
(2011)
Science and Public Controversy: Editor's Introduction
(/isis/citation/CBB001220690/)
Thesis
Mo Li;
(2017)
Science and Edgar Allan Poe's Pathway to Cosmic Truth
(/isis/citation/CBB849763322/)
Book
Hon, Giora;
Schickore, Jutta;
Steinle, Friedrich;
(2009)
Going Amiss in Experimental Research
(/isis/citation/CBB001020623/)
Article
Stephen John;
(2022)
The Two Virtues of Science
(/isis/citation/CBB589589263/)
Book
Shapin, Steven;
(2010)
Never Pure: Historical Studies of Science as If It Was Produced by People with Bodies, Situated in Time, Space, Culture, and Society, and Struggling for Credibility and Authority
(/isis/citation/CBB001020407/)
Book
Cornwell, John;
(2004)
Explanations: Styles of Explanation in Science
(/isis/citation/CBB000411055/)
Article
Raf De Bont;
(2018)
Humor in a Time of Science Wars: Rereading Isabelle Stengers
(/isis/citation/CBB044210182/)
Book
Lacey, Hugh;
(1999)
Is Science Value Free? Values and Scientific Understanding
(/isis/citation/CBB000410893/)
Book
Andrew Jewett;
(2020)
Science under Fire: Challenges to Scientific Authority in Modern America
(/isis/citation/CBB653749085/)
Article
Carlo Martini;
Mattia Andreoletti;
(2021)
Genuine versus bogus scientific controversies: the case of statins
(/isis/citation/CBB565831259/)
Book
Collins, Harry;
Evans, Robert;
(2007)
Rethinking Expertise
(/isis/citation/CBB000820155/)
Book
Hans Radder;
(2019)
From Commodification to the Common Good: Reconstructing Science, Technology, and Society
(/isis/citation/CBB983107822/)
Book
Margolis, Joseph;
Rockmore, Tom;
(2006)
History, Historicity and Science
(/isis/citation/CBB000772765/)
Book
Rehg, William;
(2009)
Cogent Science in Context: The Science Wars, Argumentation Theory, and Habermas
(/isis/citation/CBB000950309/)
Be the first to comment!