Social Epistemology 29 (2):160-184 (2015)
| Authors | |
| Abstract |
Based on an empirical study of a research team in natural science, the author argues that collaborating scientists do not trust each other completely. Due to the inherent incompleteness of trust, epistemic trust among scientists is not sufficient to manage epistemic dependency in research teams. To mitigate the limitations of epistemic trust, scientists resort to specific strategies of indirect assessment such as dialoguing practices and the probing of explanatory responsiveness. Furthermore, they rely upon impersonal trust and deploy practices of hierarchical authorship.
|
| Keywords | epistemic trust epistemic dependence scientific practice research collaboration research groups philosophy of science in practice interdisciplinarity |
| Categories | (categorize this paper) |
| DOI | 10.1080/02691728.2013.794872 |
| Options |
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Request removal from index
|
Download options
References found in this work BETA
The Advancement of Science: Science Without Legend, Objectivity Without Illusions.Philip Kitcher - 1993 - Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
The Manufacture of Knowledge: An Essay on the Constructivist and Contextual Nature of Science.Karin Knorr-Cetina - 1981 - Pergamon Press.
Experts: Which Ones Should You Trust?Alvin I. Goldman - 2001 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 63 (1):85-110.
View all 36 references / Add more references
Citations of this work BETA
Collaboration, Interdisciplinarity, and the Epistemology of Contemporary Science.Hanne Andersen - 2016 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 56:1-10.
A Role for Judgment Aggregation in Coauthoring Scientific Papers.Liam Kofi Bright, Haixin Dang & Remco Heesen - 2018 - Erkenntnis 83 (2):231-252.
Values in Science: The Case of Scientific Collaboration.Kristina Rolin - 2015 - Philosophy of Science 82 (2):157-177.
Scientific/Intellectual Movements Remedying Epistemic Injustice: The Case of Indigenous Studies.Inkeri Koskinen & Kristina Rolin - 2019 - Philosophy of Science 86 (5):1052-1063.
Values, Standpoints, and Scientific/Intellectual Movements.Kristina Rolin - 2016 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 56:11-19.
View all 9 citations / Add more citations
Similar books and articles
Epistemic Dependence and Collective Scientific Knowledge.Jeroen de Ridder - 2014 - Synthese 191 (1):1-17.
Coverage-Reliability, Epistemic Dependence, and the Problem of Rumor-Based Belief.Axel Gelfert - 2013 - Philosophia 41 (3):763-786.
Foundationalism, Epistemic Dependence, and Defeasibility.Robert Audi - 1983 - Synthese 55 (1):119 - 139.
The Relevance of Trust for Moral Justification.Theresa Weynand Tobin - 2011 - Social Theory and Practice 37 (4):599-628.
Epistemic Authority: A Theory of Trust, Authority, and Autonomy in Belief.Linda Trinkaus Zagzebski - 2012 - Oup Usa.
Climate Change Science and Responsible Trust: A Situated Approach.Heidi Grasswick - 2014 - Hypatia 29 (3):541-557.
Explanatory Independence and Epistemic Interdependence: A Case Study of the Optimality Approach.Angela Potochnik - 2010 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 61 (1):213-233.
Epistemic Trust, Epistemic Responsibility, and Medical Practice.A. P. Schwab - 2008 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 33 (4):302-320.
Evolutionary Biology and the Question of Trust.Michael Ruse - 2005 - In Noretta Koertge (ed.), Scientific Values and Civic Virtues. Oup Usa. pp. 99.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2013-12-17
Total views
91 ( #128,038 of 2,505,611 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #277,206 of 2,505,611 )
2013-12-17
Total views
91 ( #128,038 of 2,505,611 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #277,206 of 2,505,611 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads
