Beyond Trust: Plagiarism and Truth

Academic misconduct distorts the relationship between scientific practice and the knowledge it produces. The relationship between science and the knowledge it produces is, however, not something universally agreed upon. In this paper I will critically discuss the moral status of an act of research misconduct, namely plagiarism, in the context of different epistemological positions. While from a positivist view of science, plagiarism only influences trust in science but not the content of the scientific corpus, from a constructivist point of view both are at stake. Consequently, I argue that discussions of research misconduct and responsible research ought to be explicitly informed by the authors’ views on the relationship between science and the knowledge it produces.     

A pervasive denigration of natural history misconstrues how biodiversity inventories and taxonomy underpin scientific knowledge

Embracing comparative biology, natural history encompasses those sciences that discover, decipher and classify unique (idiographic) details of landscapes, and extinct and extant biodiversity. Intrinsic to these multifarious roles in expanding and consolidating research and knowledge, natural history endows keystone support to the veracity of law-like (nomothetic) generalizations in science. What science knows about the natural world is governed by an inherent function of idiographic discovery; characteristic of natural history, this relationship is exemplified wherever an idiographic discovery overturns established wisdom. This nature of natural history explicates why inventories are of such epistemological importance. Unfortunately, a Denigration of Natural History weakens contemporary science from within. It expresses in the prevalent, pervasive failure to appreciate this pivotal role of idiographic research: a widespread disrespect for how natural history undergirds scientific knowledge. Symptoms of this Denigration of Natural History present in negative impacts on scientific research and knowledge. One symptom is the failure to appreciate and support the inventory and monitoring of biodiversity. Another resides in failures of scientiometrics to quantify how taxonomic publications sustain and improve knowledge. Their relevance in contemporary science characteristically persists and grows; so the temporal eminence of these idiographic publications extends over decades. This is because they propagate a succession of derived scientific statements, findings and/or conclusions - inherently shorter-lived, nomothetic publications. Widespread neglect of natural science collections is equally pernicious, allied with disregard for epistemological functions of specimens, whose preservation maintains the veracity of knowledge. Last, but not least, the decline in taxonomic expertise weakens research capacity; there are insufficient skills to study organismal diversity in all of its intricacies. Beyond weakening research capacities and outputs across comparative biology, this Denigration of Natural History impacts on the integrity of knowledge itself, undermining progress and pedagogy throughout science. Unprecedented advances in knowledge are set to follow on consummate inventories of biodiversity, including the protists. These opportunities challenge us to survey biodiversity representatively—detailing the natural history of species. Research strategies cannot continue to ignore arguments for such an unprecedented investment in idiographic natural history. Idiographic shortcuts to general (nomothetic) insights simply do not exist. The biodiversity sciences face a stark choice. No matter how charismatic its portrayed species, an incomplete ‘Brochure of Life’ cannot match the scientific integrity of the ‘Encyclopedia of Life’.     

The Nature Index: a general framework for synthesizing knowledge on the state of biodiversity

The magnitude and urgency of the biodiversity crisis is widely recognized within scientific and political organizations. However, a lack of integrated measures for biodiversity has greatly constrained the national and international response to the biodiversity crisis. Thus, integrated biodiversity indexes will greatly facilitate information transfer from science toward other areas of human society. The Nature Index framework samples scientific information on biodiversity from a variety of sources, synthesizes this information, and then transmits it in a simplified form to environmental managers, policymakers, and the public. The Nature Index optimizes information use by incorporating expert judgment, monitoring-based estimates, and model-based estimates. The index relies on a network of scientific experts, each of whom is responsible for one or more biodiversity indicators. The resulting set of indicators is supposed to represent the best available knowledge on the state of biodiversity and ecosystems in any given area. The value of each indicator is scaled relative to a reference state, i.e., a predicted value assessed by each expert for a hypothetical undisturbed or sustainably managed ecosystem. Scaled indicator values can be aggregated or disaggregated over different axes representing spatiotemporal dimensions or thematic groups. A range of scaling models can be applied to allow for different ways of interpreting the reference states, e.g., optimal situations or minimum sustainable levels. Statistical testing for differences in space or time can be implemented using Monte-Carlo simulations. This study presents the Nature Index framework and details its implementation in Norway. The results suggest that the framework is a functional, efficient, and pragmatic approach for gathering and synthesizing scientific knowledge on the state of biodiversity in any marine or terrestrial ecosystem and has general applicability worldwide.     

Conceptual and ethical problems in the epistemology of genetic information

My thesis will be that the identification of genetic features and their medical interpretation follow at least partially from reductionist premises: “Genes are charging the gun, life(-style) will trigger it.” This simplistic metaphor illustrates a problem of genetic diagnosis: from the viewpoint of philosophy of science, concepts of the gene and the genome are vague and confused. Until now these concepts have not been defined satisfactorily. Partly on account of this there is an additional problem in applying genetic tests in medical diagnostics. The epistemic status of predictive genetic diagnosis in many cases can justifiably be called “opaque.” But a predictive genetic test is designed to reveal genetic knowledge of and for a client on the basis of scientific research. Methodologically the diagnosis of the scientific problem in genetics as a science is developed philosophically as an epistemological argument. The problem of genetics as applied science in medicine and society is the danger of irrationality due to reductionist premises of science. This problem is to be revealed by philosophical analysis. The major result of the argument is that the assessment of applications of basic research in genetics should include considerations from epistemology and philosophy of science. The epistemological status of scientific concepts and reasonableness of advice are interrelated. My thesis is that at the interface between theory of science in genetics and reasonableness of “genetic advice” is the responsibility of the researchers for concepts of their science.     

Taking evolution seriously in political science

In this essay, we explore the epistemological and ontological assumptions that have been made to make political science “scientific.” We show how political science has generally adopted an ontologically reductionist philosophy of science derived from Newtonian physics and mechanics. This mechanical framework has encountered problems and constraints on its explanatory power, because an emphasis on equilibrium analysis is ill-suited for the study of political change. We outline the primary differences between an evolutionary ontology of social science and the physics-based philosophy commonly employed. Finally, we show how evolutionary thinking adds insight into the study of political phenomena and research questions that are of central importance to the field, such as preference formation.     

Exploring the Relationships among Epistemological Beliefs, Nature of Science, and Conceptual Change in the Learning of Evolutionary Theory

We explored the relationship between epistemological beliefs and nature of science in a college biology course. One hundred thirty-three college students participated in the research. Exploratory factor analysis with 29 Nature of Science (NOS) items yielded three aspects of NOS: empirical, tentative, and sociocultural nature of scientific knowledge. Pearson r correlations suggested that students who have immature epistemological beliefs are more likely to also have immature beliefs of nature of science. In addition, students’ epistemological beliefs significantly correlate with their conceptual change but their beliefs about nature of science did not. The research is significant in that it provides empirical evidence explaining the relationship between students’ epistemological beliefs and nature of science as well as the relationships between epistemological beliefs and conceptual change in evolution theory.     

Genomics,ICT and the formation of R&D networks

Research in genomics is an example of changes induced by information and communication technologies (ICT). The emergence of interconnected ICT support for scientific work and the handling of information have changed the challenges in genomics as well as other scientific fields. The promises are significant but a large degree of uncertainty remains. While the information space is opened up, R&D cooperation essential to reaping the benefits for companies is still difficult. Moreover, in order to benefit in full from the possibility to combine knowledge on a larger scale, knowledge repositories and places of knowledge creation need to be combined. This paper discusses the new strategies of information networking between companies that emerges in response to this challenge. It concludes with an outline of a research agenda for genomics and society.     

Understanding the Human Genome Project: a biographical approach

This article analyzes a number of recently published autobiographies by leading participants in the Human Genome Project (HGP), in order to determine to what extent they may further our understanding of the history, scientific significance and societal impact of this major research endeavor. Notably, I will focus on three publications that fall under this heading, namely The common thread by John Sulston (2002/2003), The language of God (2006) by Francis Collins and A life decoded by Craig Venter (2007).1 Sulston's autobiography was co-authored by science writer Georgina Ferry. What may we learn from these autobiographical sources about the dynamics of scientific change? What is their added value in understanding science in general and the HGP in particular? These questions will be elaborated in three directions: on the level of knowledge (epistemology), power (politics) and the Self (ethics). On the epistemological level, genomics is often presented as a paradigm shift in the life sciences, a tremendous up-scaling of research, an “informatization” of life. Autobiographies may reveal how this shift – usually discussed in more general terms from a philosophy of science or science studies perspective – manifests itself on an individual scale, on a micro-epistemological level. On the political level, autobiographies may inform us about the micro-politics of scientific change. Finally, on the level of Self, autobiographies may allow us to analyze how researchers, through practices of Self, are actively engaged in constituting themselves as responsible subjects in the face of unpredictable dynamics and unforeseen dilemmas.     

The seeds and the worms: Ludwik Fleck and the early history of germ theories

The Polish microbiologist and philosopher of science, Ludwik Fleck (1896-1961), was a pioneer in constructivist history and philosophy of science. Based on studies in the history of syphilis, Fleck hypothesized that many established scientific facts are linked, in their development, to pre-scientific "proto-ideas." In 1935, Fleck proposed that the history of germ theories could be approached through his thesis on proto-ideas. His proposal, however, remained little more than a vague suggestion and was never developed in further detail. This paper introduces the concept of proto-ideas and discusses the central epistemological and historiographical implications of Fleck's thesis. The Fleckian approach offers an attractive alternative to positivist reconstructions of the early history of germ theories and provides a useful framework for a deeper understanding of the sociocultural background of the development of modern knowledge of infection.     

Fleck and the social constitution of scientific objectivity

Ludwik Fleck’s theory of thought-styles has been hailed as a pioneer of constructivist science studies and sociology of scientific knowledge. But this consensus ignores an important feature of Fleck’s epistemology. At the core of his account is the ideal of ‘objective truth, clarity, and accuracy’. I begin with Fleck’s account of modern natural science, locating the ideal of scientific objectivity within his general social epistemology. I then draw on Fleck’s view of scientific objectivity to improve upon reflexive accounts of the origin and development of the theory of thought-styles, and reply to objections that Fleck’s epistemological stance is self-undermining or inconsistent. Explicating the role of scientific objectivity in Fleck’s epistemology reveals his view to be an internally consistent alternative to recent social accounts of scientific objectivity by Harding, Daston and Galison. I use these contrasts to indicate the strengths and weaknesses of Fleck’s innovative social epistemology, and propose modifications to address the latter. The result is a renewed version of Fleck’s social epistemology, which reconciles commitment to scientific objectivity with integrated sociology, history and philosophy of science.     

Beyond the genome: Reconstituting the new genetics

The mapping and sequencing of the human genome has been the 'Holy Grail' of the new genetics, and its publication marks a turning point in the development of modern biotechnology. However, the question remains: what has been the impact of this discovery on how biotechnology develops in science, and in society at large? Using concepts developed in the social studies of science and technology, the paper begins by rehearsing the historical development of the Human Genome Project (HGP), and suggests that its translation into genomics has been achieved through a process of 'black-boxing' to ensure stabilization. It continues by exploring the extent to which the move to genomics is part of a paradigm shift in biotechnology resulting from the conceptual and organizational changes that have occurred following the completion of HGP. The discussion then focuses on whether genomics can be seen as part of the development of socially robust knowledge in late modernity. The paper suggests that there is strong evidence that a transformation is indeed taking place. It concludes by sketching a social scientific agenda for investigating the reconstitution of the new genetics in a post-genomic era using a 'situated' analytic approach based on an understanding of techno-scientific change as both emergent and contingent.     

Scientific personae in American psychology: three case studies

This paper studies the constellations of attitudes--sentimental, moral, epistemological, and social--that three leading psychologists active in turn-of-the-twentieth-century America took to be essential to the production of scientific knowledge. William James, G. Stanley Hall, and Edward Titchener located the virtues and traits proper to the scientific frame of mind, and combined them into normative images of the man of science, or, 'scientific personae' as I use the term here. I argue that their competing formulations of the scientific ethos informed their psychological practice and epistemological commitments. James, Hall, and Titchener mobilized their representations of the man of science in order to reconfigure the field of psychology and redefine its boundaries, as well as to promote forms of sociability and define the proper role of scientists both within the academy and in the wider polity.     

‘Genetics is not the issue’: Insurers on genetics and life insurance

Valorization of knowledge has been defined as a major challenge in the context of genomics as an emerging strategic research field. Valorization is a Dutch science-policy concept for what is elsewhere called science impact or the third mission of universities. This article describes the institutionalization of valorization policy in the Dutch genomics research system as a specific manifestation of a changing social contract between science and society, which mainly targets economic value creation and the stimulation of entrepreneurship. A societal debate has emerged in which this focus on economic aspects has been strongly criticized as one-sided. In response, policy-makers are willing to adopt a broader definition of valorization. On the basis of an analysis of valorization policies and practices in Dutch medical genomics, this article draws attention to two myths in this valorization debate.     

Cell biology, chemogenomics and chemoproteomics

The scientific techniques used in molecular biological research and drug discovery have changed dramatically over the past 10 years due to the influence of genomics, proteomics and bioinformatics. Furthermore, genomics and functional genomics are now merging into a new scientific approach called chemogenomics. Advancements in the study of molecular cell biology are dependent upon "omics" researchers realizing the importance of and using the experimental tools currently available to cell biologists. For example, novel microscopic techniques utilizing advanced computer imaging allow for the examination of live specimens in a fourth dimension, viz., time. Yet, molecular biologists have not taken full advantage of these and other traditional and novel cell biology techniques for the further advancement of genomic and proteomic-oriented research. The application of traditional and novel cellular biological techniques will enhance the science of genomics. The authors hypothesize that a stronger interdisciplinary approach must be taken between cell biology (and its closely related fields) and genomics, proteomics and bio-chemoinformatics. Since there is a lot of confusion regarding many of the "omics" definitions, this article also clarifies some of the basic terminology used in genomics, and related fields. It also reviews the current status and future potential of chemogenomics and its relationship to cell biology. The authors also discuss and expand upon the differences between chemogenomics and the relatively new term--chemoproteomics. We conclude that the advances in cell biology methods and approaches and their adoption by "omics" researchers will allow scientists to maximize our knowledge about life.     

Translational Science: Epistemology and the Investigative Process

The term “translational science” has recently become very popular with its usage appearing to be almost exclusively related to medicine, in particular, the “translation” of biological knowledge into medical practice. Taking the perspective that translational science is somehow different than science and that sound science is grounded in an epistemology developed over millennia, it seems imperative that the meaning of translational science be carefully examined, especially how the scientific epistemology manifests itself in translational science. This paper examines epistemological issues relating mainly to modeling in translational science, with a focus on optimal operator synthesis. It goes on to discuss the implications of epistemology on the nature of collaborations conducive to the translational investigative process. The philosophical concepts are illustrated by considering intervention in gene regulatory networks.     

Exploring the post-genomic world: differing explanatory and manipulatory functions of post-genomic sciences

Richard Lewontin proposed that the ability of a scientific field to create a narrative for public understanding garners it social relevance. This article applies Lewontin's conceptual framework of the functions of science (manipulatory and explanatory) to compare and explain the current differences in perceived societal relevance of genetics/genomics and proteomics. We provide three examples to illustrate the social relevance and strong cultural narrative of genetics/genomics for which no counterpart exists for proteomics. We argue that the major difference between genetics/genomics and proteomics is that genomics has a strong explanatory function, due to the strong cultural narrative of heredity. Based on qualitative interviews and observations of proteomics conferences, we suggest that the nature of proteins, lack of public understanding, and theoretical complexity exacerbates this difference for proteomics. Lewontin's framework suggests that social scientists may find that omics sciences affect social relations in different ways than past analyses of genetics.     

The Laboratory Technology of Discrete Molecular Separation: The Historical Development of Gel Electrophoresis and the Material Epistemology of Biomolecular Science, 1945–1970

Preparative and analytical methods developed by separation scientists have played an important role in the history of molecular biology. One such early method is gel electrophoresis, a technique that uses various types of gel as its supporting medium to separate charged molecules based on size and other properties. Historians of science, however, have only recently begun to pay closer attention to this material epistemological dimension of biomolecular science. This paper substantiates the historiographical thread that explores the relationship between modern laboratory practice and the production of scientific knowledge. It traces the historical development of gel electrophoresis from the mid-1940s to the mid-1960s, with careful attention to the interplay between technical developments and disciplinary shifts, especially the rise of molecular biology in this time-frame. Claiming that the early 1950s marked a decisive shift in the evolution of electrophoretic methods from moving boundary to zone electrophoresis, I reconstruct various trajectories in which scientists such as Oliver Smithies sought out the most desirable solid supporting medium for electrophoretic instrumentation. Biomolecular knowledge, I argue, emerged in part from this process of seeking the most appropriate supporting medium that allowed for discrete molecular separation and visualization. The early 1950s, therefore, marked not only an important turning point in the history of separation science, but also a transformative moment in the history of the life sciences as the growth of molecular biology depended in part on the epistemological access to the molecular realm available through these evolving technologies.     

The Scientific Discovery of ‘Natural Capital’: The Production of Catalytic Antibodies

Modern science has undoubtedly become one the principal engines of economic growth, even though the epistemological status of scientific knowledge has been continuously contested. Leaving the philosophical problem of knowledge aside, this paper examines how scientific discovery contributes to the production of wealth. The analysis focuses on a recent achievement at the crossroads of chemistry, immunology and biotechnology: antibody catalysis. For this purpose, we develop a model of entrepreneurial work to explain how the discovery of natural products and processes generates new economic opportunities. The proposed model is based on the assumption that scientists believe that the natural environment is a repository of ‘natural capital’. Natural capital includes goods that are not made by humans but can be used to produce other goods and services. The belief in natural capital induces scientists to search for and identify a natural property that, in the specific cultural context of their work, is recognized as a valuable resource. The selection of such a property forms the initial phase of the discovery process. Certain research methods are then deployed to create novel empirical conditions within which the selected property is transformed into a specific good. The discovery of natural capital thus comprises a historically accountable entrepreneurial endeavour.     

Closing the Gap between Knowledge and Clinical Application: Challenges for Genomic Translation

Despite early predictions and rapid progress in research, the introduction of personal genomics into clinical practice has been slow. Several factors contribute to this translational gap between knowledge and clinical application. The evidence available to support genetic test use is often limited, and implementation of new testing programs can be challenging. In addition, the heterogeneity of genomic risk information points to the need for strategies to select and deliver the information most appropriate for particular clinical needs. Accomplishing these tasks also requires recognition that some expectations for personal genomics are unrealistic, notably expectations concerning the clinical utility of genomic risk assessment for common complex diseases. Efforts are needed to improve the body of evidence addressing clinical outcomes for genomics, apply implementation science to personal genomics, and develop realistic goals for genomic risk assessment. In addition, translational research should emphasize the broader benefits of genomic knowledge, including applications of genomic research that provide clinical benefit outside the context of personal genomic risk.     

Scientific Citizenship and good governance: implications for biotechnology

In the wake of public distrust regarding biotechnology, it has been suggested that the debate should be moved "upstream", whereby the public help to set research priorities. Although many scientists see this as an illogical reaction to a loss of faith in science, we argue that the boundaries between science and its technological applications have become blurred and this produces conflicts of interests that have led to this crisis of trust. Furthermore, this distrust is also a crisis in governance that calls for a new open and democratic approach to scientific research. We propose that the concept of Scientific Citizenship, based on good governance, will help to restore public trust and bridge the gap between science and the society that it serves. Integral to this is the suggestion that the governance of science forms part of the training for scientists.