Docility as a Primary Virtue in Scientific Research

Abstract

Scientific epistemology is a topic that has sparked centuries of philosophical discourse. In particular, understanding the role that scientists play in the creation and perpetuation of scientific knowledge is a subject that continues to be hotly debated. A relative new-comer to scientific epistemology is the field of virtue epistemology, which positions knowledge creation as integrally linked to specific character traits held by the scientist. Positioning scientific research as a distinct practice, virtue epistemologists strive to understand what virtues foster robust knowledge creation. Examinations of current scientific virtue epistemology, however, reveal how framings of ''the scientist'' tend to be highly individualistic and position the individual scientist as an actor with a high level of agency and autonomy. Such approaches, while following more conventional scientific epistemology discourse, contrast significantly with a growing body of social science literature that emphasizes the group nature of scientific research and education. This paper makes use of this social science literature to critically examine current deficits in narratives of scientific virtue epistemology. It highlights the need for the prioritization of virtues that enable scientists to work and learn in social environments through social processes. In particular, it discusses how the virtue of docility, best understood as being ''open to learning'', is a key virtue for training new scientists and for establishing robust processes of knowledge creation. By identifying current deficits in the manner in which science is taught, it demonstrates the considerable epistemic consequences of training scientists who do not embody docility in all aspects of their research activities. The paper concludes by discussing how docility may be considered a key factor in an alternate understanding of the current reproducibility crisis in modern science.

An autoethnographic account of the use of Twitter for professional development by novice academic

“…This pattern of change in use over time and transition from informal use to more professional undertakings is affirmed by findings from Veletsianos, Johnson and Belikov (2019). Overall, this study demonstrated how the need for professional development motivated me to seek out opportunities using Twitter and that this professional development journey has taken several years which I believe is due to persistence and an open mind to learning (Bezuidenhout, Ratti, Warne & Beeler, 2019). This paper's potential contribution to scholarship and practice must be taken with care when generalizing its findings.…”

Humanism and History as Ethics of Institutions: A Reflection on Linda Woodhead, Truth, and Institutions

“…4 Also see (Aranzadi 2013, p. 491). 5 (Boniolo and Fiore 2010;Bezuidenhout et al 2018) Concerning codes of conduct, see (Kaptein 2010). 6 (Rawls 1999, p. 11) Much of Rawls' discussion of institutions can be found on pages 171-346.…”

Training scenes: Taking science studies to the classroom

“…This perspective contrasts to studies that deal in a more abstract manner with free-floating ‘epistemic virtues’ ( Van Dongen & Paul, 2017 , pp. 1–10) like objectivity ( Daston & Galison, 2007 ) or docility ( Bezuidenhout et al, 2019 ).…”