See also
  1. Metaphysics Within Science: Against Radical Naturalism.Fredrik Andersen & Jonas R. Becker Arenhart - 2016 - Metaphilosophy 47 (2):159-180.
    In Every Thing Must Go James Ladyman and Don Ross argue for a radical version of naturalistic metaphysics and propose that contemporary analytic metaphysics is detached from science and should be discontinued. The present article addresses the issues of whether science and metaphysics are separable, intuitions and understanding should be excluded from scientific theory, and Ontic Structural Realism satisfies the criteria of the radical version of naturalism advanced by Ladyman and Ross. The point underlying those topics is that successful scientific (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Export citation  
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  2.  31
    How biological background assumptions influence scientific risk evaluation of stacked genetically modified plants: an analysis of research hypotheses and argumentations.Fredrik Andersen & Elena Rocca - 2017 - Life Sciences, Society and Policy 13 (1):1-20.
    Scientific risk evaluations are constructed by specific evidence, value judgements and biological background assumptions. The latter are the framework-setting suppositions we apply in order to understand some new phenomenon. That background assumptions co-determine choice of methodology, data interpretation, and choice of relevant evidence is an uncontroversial claim in modern basic science. Furthermore, it is commonly accepted that, unless explicated, disagreements in background assumptions can lead to misunderstanding as well as miscommunication. Here, we extend the discussion on background assumptions from basic (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
    Export citation  
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  3.  32
    Underdetermination and evidence-based policy.Fredrik Andersen & Elena Rocca - 2020 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 84:101335.
    Safety assessment of technologies and interventions is often underdetermined by evidence. For example, scientists have collected evidence concerning genetically modified plants for decades. This evidence was used to ground opposing safety protocols for “stacked genetically modified” plants, in which two or more genetically modified plants are combined. Evidence based policy would thus be rendered more effective by an approach that accounts for underdetermination. Douglas (2012) proposes an explanatory approach, based on the criteria of transparency, empirical competence, internal consistency of explanations, (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Export citation