Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T13:23:44.226Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Threats to Freedom from a Tyranny of the Minority

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 May 2016

Malcolm L. Goggin
Get access

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Articles and Commentaries
Information
Politics and the Life Sciences , Volume 3 , Issue 1 , August 1984 , pp. 68 - 75
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Politics and the Life Sciences 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abrams, Nancy E., and Primack, Joel R. (1980a). “The Case of Radioactive Waste Management.” Environment 22: 14–20, 39.Google Scholar
Abrams, Nancy E., and Primack, Joel R. (1980b). “Critical Review and Public Assessment: A New Model for Public Participation in Technological Decisions.” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 36: 44–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abrams, Nancy E., and Primack, Joel R. (1980c). “The Public and Technological Decisions.” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 36: 44–48.Google Scholar
American Association for the Advancement of Science (1982). Intersociety Preliminary Analyses of R&D in the FY 1983 Budget. Washington, D.C.: American Association for the Advancement of Science.Google Scholar
American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (1971). “Sulfur Dioxide.” In Documentation of the Threshold Limit Values for Substances in Workroom Air. 3rd ed.Cincinatti, Ohio: American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists, pp. 238–239.Google Scholar
Ashby, Eric (1978). Reconciling Man with the Environment. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Bachrach, Peter (1967). The Theory of Democratic Elitism: A Critique. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
Baltimore, David (1978). “Limiting Science: A Biologist's Perspective.” Daedalus 107: 37–45.Google Scholar
Barnes, Ernesta (1984). Region X Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency. Personal communication.Google Scholar
Beam, David R. (1982). “Biological Science and the Art of Government: A Comment.” Politics and the Life Sciences 1: 42–44.Google Scholar
Bereano, P. L. (1969). “The Scientific Community and the Crisis of Belief.” American Scientist 57: 485–501.Google ScholarPubMed
“Biomedical Science and Its Administration: A Study of NIH” (1965). Bethesda, Md.: National Institues of Health.Google Scholar
“Briefing: Reagan Orders Review of Controls in Research.” (1983). Science 219: 473.Google Scholar
Broad, William, and Nicholas Wade (1982). Betrayers of the Truth. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
Brooks, Harvey (1968). The Government of Science. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Brown, Donald (1975). “Quality and Relevance.” The Hastings Center Report 5: 7–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Caldwell, Lynton (1964). “Biopolitics: Science, Ethics, and Public Policy.” The Yale Review 54: 1–20.Google Scholar
California Administrative Code tit. 2, R. 18,705 (amendment filed June 4, 1982).Google Scholar
Callahan, Daniel (1982). “Protecting Future Generations,” Science, Technology, Ethics, and Policy. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Carmen, Ira H. (1981). “The Constitution in the Laboratory: Recombinant DNA Research as ‘Free Expression.”’ Journal of Politics 43: 737–762.Google Scholar
Carney, William D. (1975). “Peer Review Revisited.” Science 189: 331.Google Scholar
Carson, Rachel (1962). Silent Spring. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Casper, Barry M. (1976). “Technology and Democracy: Is the Proposed Science Court What We Need?” Science 194: 29–35.Google Scholar
Chase, Harold W., and Ducat, Craig R. (1978). Corwin's The Constitution and What It Means Today. 14th ed.Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Citrin, J. (1974). “Comment [on H. Miller, 1974].” American Political Science Review 63: 951–1001.Google Scholar
Cole, Leonard A. (1981). “Science Watch.” The Sciences 21: 7–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cole, Leonard A. (1983). Politics and the Restraint of Science. Totowa, N.J.: Rowman and Allanheld.Google Scholar
Comar, Cyril (1978). “Bad Science and Social Penalties.” Science 200: 1225.Google Scholar
“Cost-benefit Analysis in the Environmental Protection Agency.” (1984). Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency.Google Scholar
Cournard, André (1977). “The Code of the Scientist and Its Relationship to Ethics.” Science 198: 699–705.Google Scholar
Culliton, Barbara J. (1975). “XYY: Harvard Researcher under Fire Stops Newborn Screening.” Science 188: 1284–1285.Google Scholar
Culliton, Barbara J. (1978). “Science's Restive Public.” Daedalus 107: 152–155.Google Scholar
Dahl, Robert (1963). A Preference to Democratic Theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Delgado, R., et al. (1983). “Can Science Be Inopportune? Constitutional Validity of Governmental Restrictions on Race-IQ Research.” UCLA Law Review 31: 128–225.Google Scholar
de Solla Price, Derek J. (1963). Little Science, Big Science. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
de Tocqueville, Alexis (1945). Democracy in America. Vol. 2. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
Dickson, David, and Noble, David (1981). “Antidemocratic Science: The New Corporate Technocrats.” The Nation 233: 193, 208–212.Google Scholar
Dyson, Freeman J. (1965). “Death of a Project.” Science 149: 141–144.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Elul, Jacques (1967). The Technological Society. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
Etzioni, Amitai, and Nunn, Clyde (1974). “The Public Appreciation of Science in Contemporary America.” Daedalus 103: 191–205.Google Scholar
Fredrickson, Donald S. (1978). “The Public Governance of Science.” Man and Medicine 3: 77–88.Google Scholar
Fredrickson, Donald S. (1982). “Statement of the Director, NIH, Accompanying the Release of the Report Concerning Martin J. Cline, M.D.” 26 May 1982. Bethesda, Md.: National Institutes of Health.Google Scholar
Fried, Charles (1975). “Public Input on Research.” Letter to the Editor. Science 189: 248.Google Scholar
Goggin, Malcolm L. (1979). “Chapter 3: The Swine Flu Immunization Program: Oversold and Underbought.” Paper prepared for the EVIST Project, Health Services Research, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, Calif.Google Scholar
Goggin, Malcolm L. (1981a). “Innovations in Medicine: Policymaking Pitfalls.” Paper presented at the meeting of the Southwestern Social Science Association, Dallas.Google Scholar
Goggin, Malcolm L. (1981b). “Science Policy Governance: Experts and Laymen.” Paper presented at the meeting of the American Political Science Association, New York.Google Scholar
Goggin, Malcolm L. (1984). “Commission Government: Collective Decision Making in the Executive Branch.” Houston, Tex.: Center for Public Policy, University of Houston.Google Scholar
Goggin, Malcolm L., and Silber, Ralph (1980). “Chapter 6: Public Participation: Society's Right to Decide.” Paper prepared for the EVIST Project, Health Services Research, Stanford University, School of Medicine, Stanford, Calif.Google Scholar
Goodfield, June (1977). Playing God: Genetic Engineering and the Manipulation of Life. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Grants Peer Review Study Team (1976). “Grants Peer Review: Report to the Director, NIH, Phase I.” Bethesda, Md.: National Institutes of Health.Google Scholar
Gray, E. (1981). “Will Big Government Stifle Universities?” Christian Science Monitor, 17 July 1981, p. 10.Google Scholar
Green, Harold (1977). “The Boundaries of Scientific Freedom.” Harvard University Newsletter on Science, Technology, and Human Values 20: 17–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, Daniel S. (1972). “Don't Ask the Barber Whether You Need A Haircut.” Saturday Review of the Sciences 25 November 1972.Google Scholar
Greep, Roy O. (1975). “Science, Politics, and Society.” Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 18: 225–235.Google Scholar
Gurin, J., and Pfund, N. E. (1980). “Bonanza in the Biolab.” The Nation 22 November 1980, pp. 542–548.Google Scholar
The Harris Survey (1974). “Public Disaffection at Record High.” 27 June 1974.Google Scholar
Hecht, Frederick (1975). “Biomedical Research: Ethics and Rights.” Letter to the Editor. Science 189: 502.Google Scholar
Hollander, R. D. (1984). “Institutionalizing Public Service Science: Its Perils and Promise.” In Peterson, James C. (ed.), Citizen Participation in Science Policy. Amherst, Mass.: University of Massachusetts Press.Google Scholar
Holman, Halstead, and Dutton, Diana B. (1978). “A Case for Public Participation in Science Policy Formation and Practice.” Southern California Law Review 51: 1505–1534.Google Scholar
Jonas, Hans (1976). “Freedom of Inquiry and the Public Interest.” Hastings Center Report 6: 15–17.Google Scholar
Jones, James (1981). Bad Blood. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Kantrowitz, Arthur (1975). “Controlling Technology Democratically.” American Scientist 63: 505–509.Google Scholar
Katz, Jay (1972). Experimentation with Human Beings. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Keyishian v. Board of Regents (1967). 385 U.S. 589, 603.Google Scholar
Kopelman, Loretta (1978). “Ethical Controversies in Medical Research: The Case of XYY Screening.” Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 21: 196–204.Google Scholar
Kornberg, Arthur (1973). “The Support of Science.” Science 180: 909.Google Scholar
Krimsky, Sheldon (1978). “A Citizen Court in the Recombinant DNA Debate.” The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 34: 37–43.Google Scholar
Krimsky, Sheldon (1983). “Science Perverted: Can It Happen Here?” The Hastings Center Report 13: 42–43.Google Scholar
Krimsky, Sheldon (1984a). “Epistemic Considerations on the Value of Folk-Wisdom in Science and Technology.” Policy Studies Review 3: 246–262.Google Scholar
Krimsky, Sheldon (1984b). “Social Risk Assessment and Group Process.” In Swapp, W. S. (ed.), Group Decision Making: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Lambright, , Henry, W. (1976). Governing Science and Technology. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
La Porte, Tod, and Metlay, Daniel (1975). “Technology Observed: Attitudes of a Wary Public.” Science 188: 121–127.Google Scholar
Lappé, Marc (1983). “Ethical Issues in Testing for Differential Sensitivity to Occupational Hazards.” Journal of Occupational Medicine 25: 797–808.Google Scholar
Lappé, Marc, and Martin, Patricia Archibold (1978). “The Place of the Public in the Conduct of Science.” Southern California Law Review 52: 1535–1539.Google Scholar
Lave, Lester B., and Romer, Thomas (1984). “Specifying Risk Goals Inherent Problems with Democratic Institutions.” Risk Analysis 3: 217–227.Google Scholar
Lear, John (1978). Recombinant DNA. New York: Crown Publishers.Google Scholar
Leskovac, H. (1984). “Ties That Bind: Conflicts of Interest in University-Industry Links.” University of California-Davis Law Review 17: 895–923.Google Scholar
“Letter to the Editor” (1975). Science 190: 326–330.Google Scholar
Levine, Adeline Gordon (1982). Love Canal: Science, Politics and People. Lexington, Mass.: D.C. Heath.Google Scholar
Luria, S. E. (1977). “The Goals of Science.” The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 33: 29–33.Google Scholar
Mahoney, M. J. (1976). The Scientist: Anatomy of the Truth Merchant. Cambridge, Mass.: Ballinger.Google Scholar
Marshall, E. (1979). “Public Attitudes to Technical Progress.” Science 205: 281–285.Google Scholar
Mazur, Allan C. (1973). Disputes between Experts. London: Minerva.Google Scholar
Mazur, Allan C. (1977). “Science Courts.” Minerva 11: 243–262.Google Scholar
McGowan, Alan (1979). “Has America Lost Faith in the Experts?” Christian Science Monitor. Western edition, December 5, p. 20.Google Scholar
Merton, Robert K. (1968). Social Theory and Social Structure. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Merton, Robert K. (1969). “The Ambivalence of Scientists.” American Scientist 57: 1–23.Google Scholar
Merton, Robert K., and Barber, Elinor (1963). “Sociological Ambivalence.” In Tiryakian, Edward A. (ed.), Sociological Theory, Values, and Socio-cultural Change. New York: The Free Press, pp. 138–163.Google Scholar
Metzger, Walter (1978). “Academic Freedom and Scientific Freedom.” Daedalus 107: 93–114.Google Scholar
Meyerhoff, A. H. (1984). “Ties That Bind: Conflicts of Interest in University-Industry Links—An Introduction.” University of California-Davis Law Review 17: 891–894.Google Scholar
Miller, H. (1974a). “Political Issues and Trust in Government: 1964–1970.” American Political Science Review 63: 951–1001.Google Scholar
Miller, H. (1974b). “Rejoinder [to J. Citrin, 1974)].” American Political Science Review 63: 951–1001.Google Scholar
Miller, Jon D., Prewitt, Kenneth, and Pearson, Robert (1980). The Attitudes of the U.S. Public toward Science and Technology. Chicago: University of Chicago, National Opinion Research Center.Google Scholar
Mitroff, Ian (1974). The Subjective Side of Science. New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Mitroff, Ian, and Chubin, Daryl E. (1979). “Peer Review at the NSF: A Dialectical Policy Analysis.” Social Studies of Science 2: 199–232.Google Scholar
Morgan, , Granger, M. (1978). “Bad Science and Good Policy Analysis.” Science 201: 971.Google Scholar
Nader, Ralph, and Abbotts, John (1977). The Menace of Atomic Energy. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
National Science Foundation (1976). “Part II: Survey Data on Public Attitudes.” In Science at the Bicentennial: A Report from the Research Community. Washington, D.C.: National Science Foundation, pp. 82–92.Google Scholar
Nelkin, Dorothy (1978). “Threats and Promises: Negotiating the Control of Research.” Daedalus 107: 191–211.Google Scholar
Nelkin, Dorothy, and Pollak, Michael (1978). “Public Participation in Technological Decisions: Reality or Grand Illusion?” Technology Review 80: 55–64.Google Scholar
Pateman, Carole (1970). Participation and Democratic Theory. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pion, G. M., and Lipsey, M. W. (1981). “Public Attitudes toward Science and Technology: What Have the Surveys Told Us?” Public Opinion Quarterly 45: 303–308.Google Scholar
Pitzer, Kenneth S. (1971). “Science and Society: Some Policy Changes Are Needed.” Science 172: 223–226.Google Scholar
Policy Research Incorporated (1977). “Appendix A: A Comprehensive Study of the Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications of Advances in Biomedical and Behavioral Research and Technology, Final Report.” In Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (1978). Special Study: Implications of Advances in Biomedical and Behavioral Research: Report and Recommendations of the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. Washington, D.C.: Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.Google Scholar
Price, Don K. (1968). The Scientific Estate. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Price, Don K. (1978). “Endless Frontier or Bureaucratic Morass.” Daedalus 107: 75–92.Google Scholar
Ramsey, Paul (1970). Fabricated Man: The Ethics of Genetic Control. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Rawls, John (1975). A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
“Reagan Science Policy.” (1982). Science 218: 659.Google Scholar
Reinhold, Robert (1982). “Administration Trying to Reconcile Scientific and Security Interests.” New York Times, February 1, p. A10.Google Scholar
Rifkin, Jeremy (1983). Algeny. New York: Viking Press.Google Scholar
Sabine, George H. “The Two Democratic Traditions.” In Smith, Michael P. (ed.), American Politics and Public Policy. New York: Random House, pp. 29–40.Google Scholar
Sayre, Wallace (1961). “Scientists and American Science Policy.” Science 133: 859–864.Google Scholar
Schneider, S. et al. (1978). “Science for the People.” Nature 274: 732.Google Scholar
Servos, J. W. (1980). “The Industrial Relations of Science: Chemical Engineering at MIT, 1900–1939.” Isis 71: 531–549.Google Scholar
Siekevitz, P. (1979a). “Scientist-entrepreneurs.” Nature 101: 100.Google Scholar
Siekevitz, P. (1979b). “Biotechnology and Profit.” Science 200: 1257–1258.Google Scholar
Siekevitz, P. (1980). “Of Patents and Prizes.” Trends in Biochemical Sciences 5: 1–3.Google Scholar
Siekevitz, P. (1981). “Patent Share-out.” Nature 103: 252.Google Scholar
Siekevitz, P. (1982). “Scientists and Judgment.” Trends in Biochemical Sciences 7: 200–220.Google Scholar
Siekevitz, P. (1983). “Interferon Research.” Science 204: 1022.Google Scholar
Singer, Maxine (1979). “Spectacular Science and Ponderous Process.” Science 203: 9.Google Scholar
Sinsheimer, Robert L. (1978). “The Presumptions of Science.” Daedalus 107: 23–36.Google Scholar
Smith, Alice K. (1965). A Peril and a Hope. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Stetten, DeWitt Jr. (1975). “Freedom of Inquiry.” Daedalus 189: 953.Google Scholar
Talbot, Bernard (1981). “Background on Committee Recommendations.” NIH Ad Hoc Committee on the UCLA Report Concerning Certain Research Activities of Dr. Martin J. Cline. May 21. Bethesda, Md.: National Institutes of Health.Google Scholar
Toulmin, Stephen (1977). “DNA and the Public Interest.” New York Times, March 12, p. 23.Google Scholar
Toulmin, Stephen (1977b). “The Research and the Public Interest.” In Research with Recombinant DNA. Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Sciences, pp. 101–106.Google Scholar
U.S. Congress (1973). Senate, Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, Subcommittee on Health. Quality of Health Care—Human Experimentation. 93rd Cong., 1st sess., Part 4.Google Scholar
U.S. Congress (1975). Senate, Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, Subcommittee on Health. Genetic Engineering. 94th Cong., 1st sess.Google Scholar
Wade, Nicholas (1978). “Gene Splicing Rules: Another Round of Debate.” Science 199: 30–33.Google Scholar
Watson, James D. (1979). “DNA Folly Continues.” The New Republic 14: 12–15.Google Scholar
Weil, Vivian(unpublished manuscript). “Technological Judgment and Public Policy.”Google Scholar
Weinberg, Alvin (1978). “Science for the People or by the People?” Nature 274: 410.Google Scholar
West, S. S. (1972). “The Ideology of Academic Scientists.” Transactions on Engineering Management. EM-7. New York: Institute of Radio Engineers, pp. 54–62.Google Scholar
Wildavsky, Aaron (1980). “Richer Is Safer.” Public Interest 60: 23–39.Google Scholar
Woolf, Patricia (1981). “Fraud in Science: How Much, How Serious?” Hastings Center Report 11: 9–14.Google Scholar
Wulff, Keith M., ed. (1979). Regulation of Scientific Inquiry. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Zimmerman, Burke K. (1984). Biofuture. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar