Openness and honesty in scientific communication
assignment requires (3000 words)
In 2009 and 2011, several thousand emails from climate scientists at the University of East Anglia were leaked after their servers were hacked. Through this leak, the public gained an insight into parts of the scientific process that are not usually public. However, this does not seem to have strengthened confidence in the research. Although later investigations have found no breach of scientific norms among the leaked information, extracts from the emails were used to try to undermine trust in climate research. For example, allegations were made, which have since been refuted, that data had been manipulated to exaggerate the importance of man-made climate change.
The incident at the University of East Anglia raises a number of questions about the consequences of the public gaining an insight into the scientific process. Openness and honesty are often highlighted as important values when scientific results are to be communicated to decision-makers and the public. But even if it is not clear that the leak significantly weakened trust in climate research in the long term, one can ask whether it is always a good idea for decision-makers and the public to get an insight into how the scientific process works.
In this assignment, you will discuss values such as openness and honesty in scientific communication. To the extent that openness and honesty are important values, why are they so? Can openness and honesty in some cases contribute to less effective dissemination of scientific results and perhaps even weaken trust in science?
A. Take as a starting point Keohane, Lane and Oppenheimer's article -The Ethics of Scientific Communication under Uncertainty- and set up a regulatory definition of -honest scientific communication- that you will use in the assignment. Discuss your definition in relation to the requirements for appropriate scope and decidability.
B. Explain how Stephen John in the article -Epistemic Trust and the Ethics of Science Communication: Against Transparency, Openness and Honesty- argues that researchers should not always practice open (English: -open- or -transparent-) and honest (English: -honest-) science communication.
C. Based on the in-depth literature, and possibly the syllabus, discuss and take a justified position on the claim that researchers should always practice open (English: -open- or -transparent-) and honest (English: -honest-) communication of science.
Curriculum literature:
Karlsen, G. (2015) Definitions, in Language and Argumentation. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget, pp. 9-32.
Briggle, A. and Mitcham, K. (2012) Ethical Concepts and Theories, in Ethics and Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Elliott, K. (2017) What if we are Uncertain?, in A Tapestry of Values. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Advanced literature:
John, S. (2018) Epistemic Trust and the Ethics of Science Communication: Against Transparency, Openness and Honesty. Social Epistemology, 32, pp. 75-87.
Kelsall, J. (2020). The Trust-Based Communicative Obligations of Expert Authorities. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 38, pp. 288-305. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/japp.12465
Keohane, R., Lane, M., & Oppenheimer, M. (2014) The Ethics of Scientific Communication under Uncertainty. Politics, Philosophy & Economics, 13, s. 343-368.
The assignment must make thorough use of the entire in-depth literature. Where relevant, you should also make use of the curriculum literature. There is nothing in the way of using other relevant literature, but it is not necessary.