Philosophical Bias, Expert Disagreement and Sustainability
Scientific controversy over sustainability is sometimes motivated by implicit assumptions of a philosophical nature. When this happens, experts might draw different conclusions even from the same data and evidence. Here, we look at how one can make our philosophical biases explicit and transparent, thereby transforming scientific controversy to constructive dialogue.
How to transform scientific controversies into constructive dialogue
Bridging the interdisciplinary gap: Unifying scientific thought processes
‘Frankenswine’, genome editing, and the question of sustainable pig farming
Saving the Unicorn of the Sea: Science, ethics and politics in the sustainable management of narwhal in east Greenland
Philosophical bias and adaptation to climate change: ‘how fit is it, really’
Sustainable care for an ageing population; interdisciplinary tensions around the role of remote care technologies
Social media and censorship – tensions over social sustainability
What is the social cost of carbon? Philosophical tensions in integrated assessment modelling
Two narratives in the circular economics controversy
Causation in Science
If we want to find the best method for detecting and establishing causal relationships, we must first have some idea of what causation is. Scientific methods thus bring with them certain philosophical biases concerning the nature of causation.
Philosophy of causation, scientific models, and medicine
Causation and scientific methods in medicine and beyond
Philosophy of Science
Some lectures on philosophy in science.
Science by accident
Science as religion
Can science dispose of free will?
Hva er forskningsetisk skjønn? Hva er etisk akseptabelt?
Webinar fra Forskningsetiske Komiteer med Hallvard Fossheim, Rani Anjum og Berge Solberg