Loading subject…
Big science
a model of scientific research characterised by large-scale funding, institutional collaboration, and international coordination, exemplified by projects such as the Manhattan Project and the Human Genome Project. Big science raises philosophical questions about resource allocation, paradigm entrenchment, and the distribution of scientific benefits across societies.
Constitutive values
Constitutive values are values internal to scientific practice that define what counts as good science, including empirical accuracy, consistency, and explanatory scope. These values guide theory choice and methodology and are widely accepted as essential to scientific inquiry.
Contextual values
Contextual values are values external to science that originate in the broader social, moral, or political environment in which research is conducted. The value-free ideal demands these be excluded from scientific reasoning, though Helen Longino argues they inevitably shape the background assumptions scientists bring to their work.
Disinterestedness
one of Robert Merton's four norms of science, holding that scientists should pursue knowledge without personal gain or self-interest as a motive. Critics argue that disinterestedness is insufficient as a moral standard, since a scientist may act without personal bias yet still bear moral culpability for failing to consider the harmful applications of their findings.
Informed consent
Informed consent is a foundational principle of research ethics requiring that participants voluntarily agree to take part in a study after receiving clear information about its nature, risks, and purpose. Established by the Nuremberg Code (1947), it affirms that the autonomy and dignity of research subjects must be respected regardless of the potential benefits.
Paradigm
in Thomas Kuhn's philosophy of science, the overarching framework of shared assumptions, methods, and exemplary problems that governs normal scientific practice within a discipline. Paradigms are socially and historically conditioned, and a paradigm shift occurs when anomalies accumulate to the point that the scientific community adopts a radically new framework.
Precautionary principle
The precautionary principle is an ethical and policy guideline holding that when an action risks serious or irreversible harm, the absence of scientific certainty should not be used to postpone preventive measures. It shifts the burden of proof onto those who wish to proceed with potentially harmful activities, and is widely applied in environmental and biomedical policy debates.
Replication Crisis
The replication crisis is an ongoing methodological problem, especially in psychology and biomedicine, in which a significant proportion of published findings cannot be reproduced by independent researchers. It has been linked to funding pressures, publication bias toward positive results, and questionable research practices such as p-hacking.
Scientific autonomy
Scientific autonomy is the principle that scientists and scientific institutions should be free to set their own research agendas, methods, and conclusions without interference from political, religious, or commercial authorities. It stands in tension with the demand for public accountability when research carries significant social consequences.
Sociology of Scientific Knowledge
The sociology of scientific knowledge (SSK), associated with David Bloor and Barry Barnes, studies how social factors, collective negotiation, and cultural context shape the content and acceptance of scientific knowledge. SSK holds that what counts as a scientific fact is partly determined by social processes rather than nature alone.
Strong Objectivity
Sandra Harding's concept of strong objectivity holds that genuine scientific objectivity requires critical examination of the social position of the knower, rather than pretending the researcher is a neutral, view-from-nowhere observer.
Value-laden
describes claims, concepts, or practices that embed or reflect value judgements rather than being grounded purely in empirical evidence and logical reasoning. Logical positivists argued that value-laden claims have no place within scientific discourse, while critics contend that science cannot be purged of them.