Description
The lack of public support for climate change policies and refusals to vaccinate children are just two alarming illustrations of the impacts of dissent about scientific claims. Dissent can lead to confusion, false beliefs, and widespread public doubt about highly justified scientific evidence. Even more dangerously, it has begun to corrode the very authority of scientific consensus and knowledge. Deployed aggressively and to political ends, some dissent can intimidate scientists, stymie research, and lead both the public and policymakers to oppose important public policies firmly rooted in science. To criticize dissent is, however, a fraught exercise. Skepticism and fearless debate are key to the scientific process, making it both vital and incredibly difficult to characterize and identify dissent that is problematic in its approach and consequences. Indeed, as de Melo-Martin and Intemann show, the criteria commonly proposed as means of identifying inappropriate dissent are flawed and the strategies generally recommended to tackle such dissent are not only ineffective but could even make the situation worse. The Fight Against Doubt proposes that progress on this front can best be achieved by enhancing the trustworthiness of the scientific community and by being more realistic about the limits of science when it comes to policymaking. It shows that a richer understanding of the context in which science operates is needed to disarm problematic dissent and those who deploy it. This, the authors argue, is the best way forward, rather than diagnosing the many instances of wrong-headed dissent.
About the Author
Inmaculada de Melo-Martin is professor of Medical Ethics at Weill Cornell Medicine. She holds as PhD in Philosophy and an M.S. in Biology. Her research focuses on ethical and epistemological issues related to biomedical sciences and technologies. She has published extensively on those topics in both philosophy and science journals. She is the author of Rethinking Reprogenetics (OUP, 2017). Kristen Intemann is an Associate Professor of Philosophy in the Department of History & Philosophy at Montana State University. She specializes in philosophy of science, particularly on issues related to values in science, scientific objectivity, and diversity in scientific communities. She has published in a variety of philosophy and science journals including Philosophy of Science, The European Journal of Philosophy of Science, Synthese, EMBO Reports, and FASEB Journal.
Reviews
The Fight Against Doubt is a valuable contribution to a topic of major social relevance ... In this book we are reminded anew of the positive value of dissent which has come out of focus in the discussion about NID [normatively inappropriate dissent]. * Daria Jadreskic, David Hopf, Tobias Schoenwitz, Journal for General Philosophy of Science *
The Fight against Doubt provides a useful description, with excellent detail and rigor, of an impressive number of examples of scientific dissent producing (or related to) some socially harmful consequences. Moreover, the authors clearly present a number of arguments to dismantle some deeply entrenched ideas about scientific dissent. * Jesus Zamora Bonilla, UNED, Theoria *
[an] excellent book ... de Melo-Martin and Intemann have provided an invaluable analysis of the failure of publics to accept the overwhelming consensus of experts and rightly warned us against attaching too much of the blame for this to dissenting voices. They also do a great service in pointing out the dangers, not merely intellectual, of overestimating the role of scientific findings in the formation of policy. * John Dupre, Philosophy of Science *
Immaculada de Melo-Martin and Kristen Intemann's The Fight against Doubt provides a clearly written and insightful contribution to this debate, with many interesting examples to help the discussion along. * Katherine Furman, University College Cork, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science *
That de Melo-Martin and Intemann share the values and concerns of many of those engaged in this debate but disagree over the best way to mitigate problematic scientific dissent is an important reason to engage with The Fight Against Doubt. Its focus on a different aspect of the mechanisms at work-the qualities of the "soil," rather than the mere existence of "seeds of doubt"-makes this a valuable book. * Erin J. Nash, Science *
a must-read for all who are interested in the health of human communities around the globe. * Maura Pilotti, Metapsychology Online *
The authors seek to reframe such discussions to recognize both the contingency of scientific results and the role of conflicting values in assessing consensus. The presentation is careful, fair, and original, free of unnecessary jargon or inflated rhetoric. Researchers and professionals working the boundary between scientific research and public policy will need to consider the views here. Because dissent against prevailing views in science touches on the foundations of scientific inquiry, this could be a useful text in undergraduate courses on the philosophy of science or public policy. Summing up: Highly Recommended * CHOICE *
Science is nothing if not probingly critical; in principle no claim, however settled, is exempt. However, there doesn't look to be any bright line marking out scientifically productive from pernicious dissent, and even if there was, shutting down dissent is unlikely to move debate forward on many of the urgent matters we currently face. What's needed, de Melo-Martin and Intemann argue, is a decisive pivot away from debate about dissent. The Fight Against Doubt is a stirring call to take up the challenges of reconfiguring scientific practice so that it warrants public trust, and of bringing to the surface, rather than suppressing, underlying disagreements about moral, political and social values. * Alison Wylie, Professor of Philosophy, University of British Columbia *
The authors analyze socially consequent dissent from scientific judgments, the contexts in which it occurs, its relations with other factors that affect public policies, and the difficulties of defining when it is normatively inappropriate. Their analysis is comprehensive, lucid, nuanced, often original, and accompanied by illuminating examples from research in climate science, medicine, and agriculture. I recommend for all concerned about current threats to the integrity and authority of science. * Hugh Lacey, Scheuer Family Professor of Philosophy Emeritus, Swarthmore College *
Intemann and de Melo-Martin acknowledge that commercial and political interests have damaged public trust in science, opening the door for more dissent than is justified. They make positive suggestions for handling this dissent: not by dismissing it as unscientific, but by improving the ethical conduct of science and acknowledging the role that values play in scientific inquiry. The result is a thoughtful set of practical recommendations for improving the interactions between science and society. * Miriam Solomon, Professor and Department Chair, Philosophy, Temple University *
Book Information
ISBN 9780190869229
Author Inmaculada de Melo-Martin
Format Hardback
Page Count 232
Imprint Oxford University Press Inc
Publisher Oxford University Press Inc
Weight(grams) 454g
Dimensions(mm) 163mm * 239mm * 23mm
About the Author
Inmaculada de Melo-Martin is professor of Medical Ethics at Weill Cornell Medicine. She holds as PhD in Philosophy and an M.S. in Biology. Her research focuses on ethical and epistemological issues related to biomedical sciences and technologies. She has published extensively on those topics in both philosophy and science journals. She is the author of Rethinking Reprogenetics (OUP, 2017). Kristen Intemann is an Associate Professor of Philosophy in the Department of History & Philosophy at Montana State University. She specializes in philosophy of science, particularly on issues related to values in science, scientific objectivity, and diversity in scientific communities. She has published in a variety of philosophy and science journals including Philosophy of Science, The European Journal of Philosophy of Science, Synthese, EMBO Reports, and FASEB Journal.
Reviews
The Fight Against Doubt is a valuable contribution to a topic of major social relevance ... In this book we are reminded anew of the positive value of dissent which has come out of focus in the discussion about NID [normatively inappropriate dissent]. * Daria Jadreskic, David Hopf, Tobias Schoenwitz, Journal for General Philosophy of Science *
The Fight against Doubt provides a useful description, with excellent detail and rigor, of an impressive number of examples of scientific dissent producing (or related to) some socially harmful consequences. Moreover, the authors clearly present a number of arguments to dismantle some deeply entrenched ideas about scientific dissent. * Jesus Zamora Bonilla, UNED, Theoria *
[an] excellent book ... de Melo-Martin and Intemann have provided an invaluable analysis of the failure of publics to accept the overwhelming consensus of experts and rightly warned us against attaching too much of the blame for this to dissenting voices. They also do a great service in pointing out the dangers, not merely intellectual, of overestimating the role of scientific findings in the formation of policy. * John Dupre, Philosophy of Science *
Immaculada de Melo-Martin and Kristen Intemann's The Fight against Doubt provides a clearly written and insightful contribution to this debate, with many interesting examples to help the discussion along. * Katherine Furman, University College Cork, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science *
That de Melo-Martin and Intemann share the values and concerns of many of those engaged in this debate but disagree over the best way to mitigate problematic scientific dissent is an important reason to engage with The Fight Against Doubt. Its focus on a different aspect of the mechanisms at work-the qualities of the "soil," rather than the mere existence of "seeds of doubt"-makes this a valuable book. * Erin J. Nash, Science *
a must-read for all who are interested in the health of human communities around the globe. * Maura Pilotti, Metapsychology Online *
The authors seek to reframe such discussions to recognize both the contingency of scientific results and the role of conflicting values in assessing consensus. The presentation is careful, fair, and original, free of unnecessary jargon or inflated rhetoric. Researchers and professionals working the boundary between scientific research and public policy will need to consider the views here. Because dissent against prevailing views in science touches on the foundations of scientific inquiry, this could be a useful text in undergraduate courses on the philosophy of science or public policy. Summing up: Highly Recommended * CHOICE *
Science is nothing if not probingly critical; in principle no claim, however settled, is exempt. However, there doesn't look to be any bright line marking out scientifically productive from pernicious dissent, and even if there was, shutting down dissent is unlikely to move debate forward on many of the urgent matters we currently face. What's needed, de Melo-Martin and Intemann argue, is a decisive pivot away from debate about dissent. The Fight Against Doubt is a stirring call to take up the challenges of reconfiguring scientific practice so that it warrants public trust, and of bringing to the surface, rather than suppressing, underlying disagreements about moral, political and social values. * Alison Wylie, Professor of Philosophy, University of British Columbia *
The authors analyze socially consequent dissent from scientific judgments, the contexts in which it occurs, its relations with other factors that affect public policies, and the difficulties of defining when it is normatively inappropriate. Their analysis is comprehensive, lucid, nuanced, often original, and accompanied by illuminating examples from research in climate science, medicine, and agriculture. I recommend for all concerned about current threats to the integrity and authority of science. * Hugh Lacey, Scheuer Family Professor of Philosophy Emeritus, Swarthmore College *
Intemann and de Melo-Martin acknowledge that commercial and political interests have damaged public trust in science, opening the door for more dissent than is justified. They make positive suggestions for handling this dissent: not by dismissing it as unscientific, but by improving the ethical conduct of science and acknowledging the role that values play in scientific inquiry. The result is a thoughtful set of practical recommendations for improving the interactions between science and society. * Miriam Solomon, Professor and Department Chair, Philosophy, Temple University *
Book Information
ISBN 9780190869229
Author Inmaculada de Melo-Martin
Format Hardback
Page Count 232
Imprint Oxford University Press Inc
Publisher Oxford University Press Inc
Weight(grams) 454g
Dimensions(mm) 163mm * 239mm * 23mm
