The Science of Liberty: Democracy, Reason and the Laws of Nature by Timothy Ferris“Ferris is a master analogist who conveys his insights on the history of cosmology with a lyrical flair.” —The New York Times Book Review
In The Science of Liberty, award-winning author Timothy Ferris—called “the best popular science writer in the English language today” by the Christian Science Monitor and “the best science writer of his generation” by the Washington Post—makes a passionate case for science as the inspiration behind the rise of liberalism and democracy. In the grand tradition of such luminaries of the field as Bill Bryson, Richard Dawkins, and Oliver Sacks—as well as his own The Whole Shebang and Coming of Age in the Milky Way—Ferris has written a brilliant chronicle of how science sparked the spread of liberal democracy and transformed today’s world.
What is Democracy ? Why democracy ? - ep01 - BKP - Class 9 civics chapter 2 cbse ncert in hindi
Varieties of Democracy in Science Policy
September 14, by Matthew J. These questions are, Kitcher thinks, both natural ones deserving to be posed and answered, as well as ones that are traditionally ignored by philosophers of science. In the first part, Kitcher argues against the detractors that science is, indeed, an objective, truth-seeking enterprise, but against the enthusiasts, he argues that the contents of science are contextual and interest-relative—both what we inquire into and the categories that structure are inquiry are sensitive to our interests and purposes. This part culminates in the claim that what science seeks is not mere truth, but significant truth , and scientific significance is a matter of the practical and epistemic interests served by various scientific ideas and projects, along with the myriad logical and empirical connections between them. In the second part, this contextual representation of scientific significance is used as an input to an ideal democratic procedure—a deliberation between idealized representatives of the preferences of actual citizens take up this information, mutually inform one another about their preferences, with the goal of consensus at best, or a majority-supported compromise at worst—with the output being the ideal research agenda for science, a schedule of priorities for research meeting the interests and purposes of our society. This is why, in my opinion, that objectivity is so important in science as the evidence proposed by those with dissenting opinions should be given the opportunity to be examined, tested, and verified by professional scientists. After all, where would we be if dissenters like Copernicus, Galileo, Newton, and Darwin had been quashed?
Kitcher foresees 3 possibilities:. Then vote on all lists in the union of all the sets. Kitcher deals with this problem by saying that all this information should be taken into consideration. Kitcher recognizes that there may be cases in which people cannot reach agreement because they have fundamentally different views about such things as the moral status of fetuses or animals Given this analysis, he can now define well-ordered science as that which invariably leads to investigations that coincide in all three ways with what the ideal deliberators would choose
The Social Sciences and Democracy pp Cite as. In Science, Truth and Democracy , Philip Kitcher distinguishes four forms of science policy: internal elitism, external elitism, vulgar democracy and enlightened democracy. I show that Kitcher has two characterisations of vulgar democracy, and that his argument against vulgar democracy is invalid under both characterisations. But that leaves open many options, especially with respect to the main topic viz. Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF. Skip to main content.
Democracy and Human Values in the Age of Science and Technology
Philip Kitcher's Science in a Democratic Society makes powerful and original contributions not only to general philosophy of science, but also to ethical theory, political philosophy, social epistemology, and speculative anthropology and sociobiology. Kitcher radically extends the agenda of his earlier work, Science, Truth, and Democracy , which sought to provide a framework for determining the role of values in determining the ideal research agenda for science in a democratic society. Where Science, Truth, and Democracy focused on the aims of science, Science in a Democratic Society considers the acceptance of scientific claims, their application and dissemination, and the role of diversity and dissent within science as well as public dissent about science.
Will argue that moral and social values are intrinsic to science — q. Will examine this commitment by considering unity-of-science movement What law of science does Dolly illustrate? And if we say those we find in need of explanation, we are bringing in our interests. Kitcher raises two objections to this suggestion:. That sounds like it might include physics, if we take everything back to the big bang, but what about the rest of science?
Science, Truth, and Democracy. Kitcher cuts a clear path between those who worship science as a religion and those who fashionably insist that science is merely a set of arbitrary constructs masking power and greed. Against the universal skepticism of post-modernism he argues that science does, indeed, produce knowledge. He phrases his affirmation carefully: "The success that people collectively enjoy in predicting the behavior of objects that exist independently of all of us and in adjusting our actions to them indicates that our most successful ways of representing the world are approximately correct. Just as the maps we make reveal the interests of our societies, so scientists, confronted with a potential infinity of things to study, "address the issues that are significant for people at a particular stage in the evolution of human culture.