Scientific Disagreements, Fast Science and Higher-Order Evidence

Philosophy of Science 90 (4):937-957 (2023)
  Copy   BIBTEX


Scientific disagreements are an important catalyst for scientific progress. But what happens when scientists disagree amidst times of crisis, when we need quick yet reliable policy guidance? In this paper we provide a normative account for how scientists facing disagreement in the context of ‘fast science’ should respond, and how policy makers should evaluate such disagreement. Starting from an argumentative, pragma-dialectic account of scientific controversies, we argue for the importance of ‘higher-order evidence’ (HOE) and we specify desiderata for scientifically relevant HOE. We use our account to analyze the controversy about the aerosol transmission of COVID-19.



External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Genuine versus bogus scientific controversies: the case of statins.Carlo Martini & Mattia Andreoletti - 2021 - History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 43 (4):1-23.
Whither Higher-Order Evidence?Daniel Whiting - 2019 - In Mattias Skipper & Asbjørn Steglich-Petersen (eds.), Higher-Order Evidence: New Essays. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.
Evidence of Evidence as Higher Order Evidence.Anna-Maria A. Eder & Peter Brössel - 2019 - In Mattias Skipper & Asbjørn Steglich-Petersen (eds.), Higher-Order Evidence: New Essays. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press. pp. 62-83.
Scientific Theory Eliminativism.Peter Vickers - 2014 - Erkenntnis 79 (1):111-126.
Methodological and contextual factors in the dawkins/gould dispute over evolutionary progress.Timothy Shanahan - 2001 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 32 (1):127-151.
The Law-Set: The Legal-Scientific Production of Medical Propriety.Gary Edmond - 2001 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 26 (2):191-226.
Learning from Scientific Disagreement.Bruno Borge & Nicolás Lo Guercio - 2021 - Theoria: Revista de Teoría, Historia y Fundamentos de la Ciencia 36 (3):375-398.
Higher-Order Evidence.Daniel Whiting - 2021 - Analysis 80 (4):789-807.


Added to PP

349 (#54,895)

6 months
160 (#17,742)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Daniel C. Friedman
Stanford University
Dunja Šešelja
Ruhr-Universität Bochum

Citations of this work

Fast Science.Jacob Stegenga - forthcoming - The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Reflection and disagreement.Adam Elga - 2007 - Noûs 41 (3):478–502.
Higher‐Order Evidence and the Limits of Defeat.Maria Lasonen-Aarnio - 2014 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 88 (2):314-345.
The Epistemic and the Zetetic.Jane Friedman - 2020 - Philosophical Review 129 (4):501-536.
Peer disagreement and higher order evidence.Thomas Kelly - 2011 - In Alvin I. Goldman & Dennis Whitcomb (eds.), Social Epistemology: Essential Readings. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 183--217.

View all 36 references / Add more references