Towards a Direct Role for Values in the Heart of Science

Abstract Douglas has argued that if values were accorded a “direct” role during the “internal” phases of science, this would amount to “wishful thinking” in place of evidence. This article draws on two claims that jointly threaten this position. First, building a cogent ethical case in favor of a claim about what ought to happen is not a simple matter of saying what one wishes were true; a good ethical case has a kind of discipline to it. Second, some theorists have argued that scientists do and should defend “mixed hypotheses,” that is, hypotheses that implicate both factual and evaluative content.