Altonaer Stiftung Workshop
Environmental and Technology Ethics
Hamburg 27 - 29 June, 2005
Matti Sintonen
Department of Philosophy
Univesity of Helsinki
[email protected]
Altonaer Stiftung 2005 Sintonen
Bertrand Russell´s Argument
Russell´s at the Heavenly Door: Lord, I could
not know; You did not give enough evidence
Clifford´s Ethics of Belief:
It is wrong, for anyone, ever, to believe
anything without sufficient evidence
When is evidence sufficient? Knowledge guides
action, and collecting all evidence would
amount to paralysis
William James´ Will to Believe
Altonaer Stiftung 2005 Sintonen
Richard Rudner vs. Carl Hempel
Richard Rudner: Scientists cannot help making value
judgments
The test case: estimating the pros and cons of releasing
a drug
Carl Hempel and the cognitivists: assessing truth and
probability is one thing, acting and deciding on policy is
another thing
The cognitivist´s ethics of belief: one ought not let noncognitive consideration affect cognitive appraisal
Altonaer Stiftung 2005 Sintonen
von Wright on Technical Norms
Categorical norm: In situation X, one should do Y
Note: these are not true or false, but like norms and
commands, perhaps morally, legally or socially
justified
Technical norm: If you want to achieve a practical
goal Z, in a situation X you should do Y
Note 1: These are true or false recommendations
concerning a choice of means to a goal: the means
should be necessary or sufficient to attaining the goal,
or at least they should make its attainment (more)
probable
Altonaer Stiftung 2005 Sintonen
More on Technical Norms
Note 2: The distinction involves a distinction
between the researcher and the (potential)
decision-maker: the decision maker sets the goal
Z, and asks for help in the search for answers; the
inquirer confines, ex officio, to the selection of the
means.
Note 3: This involves the distinction between goal
rationality and means rationality
Altonaer Stiftung 2005 Sintonen
Rationality
Von Wright later distinguishes between the Rationable
and the Reasonable
The Rational: province of logic - consistency
Reasonableness: a thicker notion which rules out some
consistent outcomes as unreasonable
Chaim Perelman’s distinction on legal argumentatino:
the proposal must bu acceptaqble to the audience
Aulis Aarnio: The Rational and the Reasonable
My analolgue: positive law and natural law
Altonaer Stiftung 2005 Sintonen
In Principle and in Practice
The cognitivists: the distinction between fact
and value is a cornerstone of rational thought
and action and hence analytically ineliminable
Scientists qua scientists make no value
judgments
The official doctrine: in science you maximise
cognitive values (for the realists, truth and
information)
Isaac Levi: Gambling with Truth
But: in practice scientists do make value
judgments! How?
Altonaer Stiftung 2005 Sintonen
But in Practice
But: in practice scientists do make value
judgments! How?
One can have two roles (scientist and citizen)
and sit on two chairs (fact and value) at the
same time
Scientists are committed to two (or more)
realms of value, cognitive and practical
(economic, moral, etc)
There can be conflicts on particular choices
Altonaer Stiftung 2005 Sintonen
Is cognitivism defensible?
One problem: the choice of the alternatives
subjected to cognitive appraisal may be guided
by non-cognitive considerations
Can this be avoided, and should it be?
Especially in increasingly important nonacademic research operationalising the
question and answering it are intertwined
What the question is is non-trivial!
Altonaer Stiftung 2005 Sintonen
Interdisciplinarity and the Identity
of the Question
Each discipline uses its own descriptive
language and explanatory ideals to canvass the
target questions
Problem: disciplinary(cognitive and noncognitive) interests enter into determining the
main question in research:
Exactly what was the question?
There always is more to a question than meets
the ear!
Altonaer Stiftung 2005 Sintonen
Interdisciplinarity (and Nondisciplinarity, if any)
The essential tension (Kuhn): learning the
apparatus (conceptual and other) of a
discipline - and the tricks of the trade takes
years of unquestioning toil
Once you are a card-carrying member you slice
the world using the particular apparatus
It is (almost?) too late, then, to recognise other
points of view
Altonaer Stiftung 2005 Sintonen
Precaution and Interdisciplinarity
Perhaps this justifies precaution: one-sided
conceptual diet causes myopia and narrow
focus?
But is this the norm and is it inevitable?
Is this proof that scientific quality control fails?
Yes, at least in practice, often - but does this
testify that the ideal of expert decision making
fails?
Altonaer Stiftung 2005 Sintonen
Another essential tension
The problem is magnified by the fact that
much of this non-academic research is
interdisciplinary
Kuhn was concerned with a cognitive
tension and worried about obstacles to
innovativeness
But: one-sided cognitive diet has moral
and other non-cognitive repercussions
Altonaer Stiftung 2005 Sintonen