Search

This chapter presents a heuristic on how to distinguish between three modes of contestation of scientific evidence, knowledge and expertise in knowledge societies. The first mode of contestation questions the validity and reliability of scientific knowledge; the second one raises doubts that the specific scientific expertise is adequate for solving the political problem at hand; and the third one criticizes the scientific field's exposed position in matters of decision- and policy-making and administrative processes. The three forms of contestation have different effects on the recognition of science. In the first mode, scientific evidence is problematized. In the second mode, its political framing and usage is questioned, without denying the role of scientific evidence in political and administrative decision-making in principle. In the third mode, the relevance of scientific evidence for political decision-making is questioned.

This article is an introduction to the special issue on philosophy of medicine. Philosophy of medicine is a field that has flourished in the last couple of decades and has become increasingly institutionalized. The introduction begins with a brief overview of some of the most central recent developments in the field. It then describes the six articles that comprise this issue., Ovaj je članak uvod u posebno izdanje o filozofiji medicine. Filozofija medicine je područje koje je procvjetalo u posljednjih nekoliko desetljeća i postaje sve više institucionalizirano. Uvod počinje kratkim pregledom nekih od najvažnijih najnovijih zbivanja na tom području. Zatim opisuje šest članaka koji sačinjavaju ovo posebno izdanje.

Jyväskylässä 5.9.2015 pidetty Lectio Praecursoria.

Lattiapaikkoja myöten täysi salillinen pääsi kuuntelemaan tieteenfilosofi Helen Longinon (s. 1944) luentoa keväällä Turun yliopistolla. Stanfordin yliopiston filosofian professori Longino tunnetaan sosiaalisen epistemologian uranuurtajana. Teoksissaan hän on selvittänyt, miten tutkimuksen sosiaalinen konteksti vaikuttaa tuotettuun tietoon. Hän on rakentanut siltaa perinteisen tieteenfilosofian ja tieteensosiologian välillä. Turussa professori Longino puhui tuoreesta kirjastaan Studying Human Behavior. How Scientists Investigate Aggression and Sexuality (2013). Hän näkee etenkin erityistieteiden filosofian tulevaisuuden valoisana: ”Filosofit ovat entistä kiinnostuneempia tieteeseen liittyvistä sosiaalisista ja yhteiskunnallisista kysymyksistä". nonPeerReviewed

This chapter discusses the development of invasive species research and policy throughout the 20th century as a paradigmatic model case for reflecting evidence practices and evidence contestation in ecology and environmental decision-making. It reviews how the initial framing of invasive species research and policy formulated in the 1950s–1980s was increasingly contested and how invasion scientists responded to growing dissent and post-normality. It concludes with the proposition that consensus on environmental action, despite uncertain facts and pluralism, depends on the continuous nurturing of an ecological citizenship that builds on a carefully interwoven web of ecological knowledge, social institutions and cultural practices. This can only be reached through collaboration among the ecological, social and human sciences, the arts, nature-based practitioners and civil society to simultaneously address the embeddedness of ecological knowledge in social and cultural contexts and the embeddedness of social and cultural practices in an ecological lifeworld.