Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Admitting false negatives leads to underregulation and gr... — Carmelics
    Home/Bioethics
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→The decision about where to set an unsafe exposure threshold for dioxins depends on whether protecting public health or protecting industry from regulation is prioritized.

    Admitting false negatives leads to underregulation and greater risk to public health.

    BioethicsConsequentialism
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    BioethicsConsequentialism

    Connections

    1 topic

    Truth & Knowledge1 linked

    Related

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Bioethics
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Admitting false positives leads to overregulation of the chemical industry.Setting the threshold for a statistically significant difference between experim...The decision about where to set an unsafe exposure threshold for dioxins depends...

    Similar

    Admitting false positives leads to overregulation of the chemical indu...80%Using stigma as a public health tool is unjust when the targeted behav...70%There is insufficient evidence that intentional stigmatization is effe...69%Using stigma as a public health tool is unjust when the targeted behav...69%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: science-theory-observation
    View source passageHide passage
    Similarly, fine points can be made about the nature of values involved in these various contexts. Such clarification is likely important for determining whether the contribution of certain values in a given context is deleterious or salutary, and in what sense. Douglas (2013) argues that the ‘value’ of internal consistency of a theory and of the empirical adequacy of a theory with respect to the available evidence are minimal criteria for any viable scientific theory (799–800). She contrasts the

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective