PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 1, 2022Kennedy Institute of Ethics journal40 citationsOpen Access

The Epistemic Risk in Representation

SHStephanie HarvardEWEric Winsberg

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

Both the distinction between the 'internal' and 'external' phases of science and the concept of 'inductive risk' are core constructs in the values in science literature. However, both constructs have shortcomings, which, we argue, have concealed the unique significance of values in scientific representation. We defend three closely-related proposals to rectify the problem: i) to draw a conceptual distinction between endorsing a 'fact' and making a decision about representation; ii) to employ a conception of inductive risk that aligns with this distinction, not one between internal/external phases in science; iii) to conceptualize 'representational risk' as a unique epistemic risk, no less significant than inductive risk. We outline the implications of each proposal for current debates in the values in science literature.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Harvard et al. (2022) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69dc39728bac30e30e9f565fhttps://doi.org/10.1353/ken.2022.0001
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper