Science & Education

, Volume 17, Issue 6, pp 669–676 | Cite as

The Distinction Between Epistemic and Non-Epistemic Values in the Natural Sciences

  • Maria Pournari


In this paper I examine the particular question of the meaning of the distinction between epistemic and non-epistemic values in the natural sciences and, if this would make sense, the possibility to transcend this distinction. I claim that the distinction between epistemic and non-epistemic values maintains its necessity as long as a certain sort of unity between the theoretical and the practical sides of the scientific endeavour has not been achieved. The distinction in question would cease to have meaning only from the perspective of such a unity, since in this manner the normative dimension of science would become an internal term for its historical construction.


Scientific Realism Empirical Adequacy Scientific Endeavour Scientific Hypothesis Logical Empiricist 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Allchin D (1999) Values in science: an educational perspective. Sci & Educ 8(1):1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aristotelis (1964) 1968 Analytica Priora et Posteriora, In: Ross WD (ed) OxoniiGoogle Scholar
  3. Aristotelis (1958) Topika et Sophistici Elenchi, In: Ross WD (ed) OxoniiGoogle Scholar
  4. Aristotelis (1950) Physica, In: Ross WD (ed) OxoniiGoogle Scholar
  5. Bacon F (1620/1960) The new Organon and related writings, In: Anderson FH (ed) Bobbs-Merill, IndianapolisGoogle Scholar
  6. Baloshov Y, Rosenberg A (eds) (2002) Philosophy of science, contemporary readings. Routledge, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  7. Blake R et al (1960) Theories of scientific method: the renaissance through the nineteenth century. University of Washington Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  8. Burtt EA (1967) The metaphysical foundations of modern physical science. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  9. Carnap R (1966) An introduction to the philosophy of science. Dover, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. Curd M, Cover JA (eds) (1998) Philosophy of Science, the central issues. W.W. Norton & Company, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. Davson-Galle P (2002) Science, values and objectivity. Sci & Educ 11:191–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Descartes R (1637/1985–91) Cottingham J, Stoothoff R, Murdoch D, Κenny Α (eds) The philosophical writings of Descartes, vol 3. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  13. Dijksterhuis EJ (1961) The mechanization of the world picture. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  14. Gower B (1997) Scientific method, an historical and philosophical introduction. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  15. Kuhn TS 1962/1970 The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago University Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  16. Kuhn TS (1974) The essential tension, selected studies in scientific tradition and change. Chicago University Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  17. Laudan L (1984) Science and values: the aims of science and their role in scientific debate. University of California Press, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  18. Lacey H (1999) Scientific understanding and the control of nature. Sci & Educ 8(1):13–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Longino H (1990) Science as social knowledge: values and objectivity in scientific inquiry. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJGoogle Scholar
  20. Losee J (1972) An historical introduction to the philosophy of science. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  21. Machamer P, Douglas H (1999) Cognitive and social values. Sci & Educ 8(1):45–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. McMullin E (1982) Values in science. In: Asquith P, Nickles T (eds) Philosophy of science association. East Lansing, MI, pp 3–28Google Scholar
  23. McMullin Ε (1993) Rationality and paradigm change in science. In: Horwich P (ed) World changes: Thomas Kuhn and the nature of science. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass, pp 55–78Google Scholar
  24. Mill JS (1843/1961) A system of logic. Longmans, LondonGoogle Scholar
  25. Oppenheim P, Putnam H (1987) Unity of science as a working hypothesis. In: Kourany J (ed) Scientific knowledge, basic issues in the philosophy of science. Belmont, Wadsworth P.C., California, pp 296–316Google Scholar
  26. Okruhlik K (1994) Gender and the Biological Sciences. Biology and Society. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 20, 21–42Google Scholar
  27. Peirce CS (1931) Collected papers. In: Hartshorn C, Weiss P (eds) Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  28. Popper K (1934/1959) Logik der Forschung, Vienna. The logic of scientific discovery, Hutchinson, LondonGoogle Scholar
  29. Popper K (1963) Conjectures and refutations, the growth of scientific knowledge. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  30. Richards S (1983) Philosophy and sociology of science. An Introduction, Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  31. Van Fraassen BC (1980) The scientific image. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  32. Westfall R (1977–90) The construction of modern science, mechanismus and mechanics. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  33. Whewell W (1851) Of the transformation of hypotheses in the history of science. Trans Cam Phil Soc 9:139–147Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Primary Education, School of EducationUniversity of IoanninaIoanninaGreece

Personalised recommendations