Science Advice in an Environment of Trust: Trusted, but Not Trustworthy?

Social Epistemology 36 (5):629-640 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This paper examines the conditions of trustworthy science advice mechanisms, in which scientists have a mandated role to inform public policymaking. Based on the literature on epistemic trust and public trust in science, we argue that possession of relevant expertise, justified moral and political considerations, as well as proper institutional design are conditions for trustworthy science advice. In order to assess these conditions further, we explore the case of temporary advisory committees in Norway. These committees exemplify a de facto trusted and seemingly well-functioning science advice mechanism. Still, this mechanism turns out to poorly realize some central conditions of trustworthy science advice. From this we draw three lessons. Firstly, it remains crucial to distinguish between well-placed and de facto trust. Secondly, some conditions of trustworthy science advice seem more significant than others and there are thresholds for realizing each condition. Thirdly, not only does the institutional design and organization of science advice matter more than often recognized; the trust and trustworthiness of the broader social and political context and institutional environment make a difference as well.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

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

In AI We Trust: Ethics, Artificial Intelligence, and Reliability.Mark Ryan - 2020 - Science and Engineering Ethics 26 (5):2749-2767.
Trustworthiness of autonomous systems.S. Kate Devitt - 2018 - In Hussein A. Abbass, Jason Scholz & Darryn Reid (eds.), Foundations of Trusted Autonomous Systems. Springer. pp. 161-184.
Trust and Belief.Arnon Keren - forthcoming - In Judith Simon (ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Trust and Philosophy. New York, USA: pp. 109-120.
Trusting in order to inspire trustworthiness.Michael Pace - 2020 - Synthese 198 (12):11897-11923.
Demoralizing Trust.Matthew Bennett - 2021 - Ethics 131 (3):511-538.
Demoralising Trust.Matt Bennett - 2021 - Ethics 131 (3).
Actions of Trust and Their Cognitive Motivation.Christian Carbonell - 2021 - Undergraduate Philosophy Journal of Australasia 3:19-35.

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-08-27

Downloads
51 (#306,042)

6 months
14 (#170,561)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Torbjørn Gundersen
Oslo Metropolitan University
Cathrine Holst
University of Oslo

Citations of this work

How can we assess whether to trust collectives of scientists?Elinor Clark - forthcoming - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Trust and antitrust.Annette Baier - 1986 - Ethics 96 (2):231-260.
Experts: Which ones should you trust?Alvin I. Goldman - 2001 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 63 (1):85-110.
Inductive risk and values in science.Heather Douglas - 2000 - Philosophy of Science 67 (4):559-579.
What Is Epistemic Public Trust in Science?Gürol Irzık & Faik Kurtulmuş - 2019 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 70 (4):1145-1166.
Science in a Democratic Society.Philip Kitcher - 2011 - Poznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities 101:95-112.

View all 20 references / Add more references