Full text
Dang, Haixin. Do Collaborators in Science Need to Agree?
2019, Philosophy of Science 86, 1029-1040
Expand entry
Added by: Björn Freter, Contributed by: Dana Tulodziecki
Abstract: I argue that collaborators do not need to reach broad agreement over the justification of a consensus claim. This is because maintaining a diversity of justifiers within a scientific collaboration has important epistemic value. I develop a view of collective justification that depends on the diversity of epistemic perspectives present in a group. I argue that a group can be collectively justified in asserting that P as long as the disagreement among collaborators over the reasons for P is itself justified. In conclusion, I make a case for multimethod collaborative research and work through an example in the social sciences.
Comment: Reading connecting philosophy of science and social epistemology; suitable for lower-level classes and up; good article for highlighting one way in which science is a social epistemic enterprise
Can’t find it?
Contribute the texts you think should be here and we’ll add them soon!