Epistemic Implications of Scientific Consensus and Dissent

Congratulations to Chloe Stephenson on the defense of her MA thesis, Epistemic Implications of Scientific Consensus and Dissent.

Her committee members included Marc Ereshefsky, Megan Delehanty, Ken Waters.

We asked Chloe to provide us with some insight into her thesis, and her graduate studies experience in the Department of Philosophy at the University of Calgary.

Tell us about your thesis topic.

Consensus and dissent play important roles in science, but they are not always epistemically beneficial: scientific consensus might be biased or misleading, and epistemically detrimental dissent is a growing problem. In my thesis, I explore epistemic implications of consensus and dissent in science. I investigate and evaluate accounts of epistemically justified consensus and promising avenues to address the problem of epistemically detrimental dissent.

What was the most valuable outcome of the Graduate program for you?

The most valuable outcome of the Graduate program was the chance to explore academic philosophy with wonderful and supportive faculty and peers. I enjoyed taking courses across a broad range of areas and I will miss discussing philosophy in the lounge!

What are the next steps/plans for you?

My thesis topic got me interested in health policy, so I started a Master’s in Public and Global Health at Tampere University (Finland) in August.