Biddle Justin B
Stud Hist Philos Sci. 2014 Mar;45:14-23. doi: 10.1016/j.shpsa.2013.12.001.
A topic of growing importance within philosophy of science is the epistemic implications of the organization of research. This paper identifies a promising approach to social epistemology--nonideal systems design--and uses it to examine one important aspect of the organization of research, namely the system of patenting and licensing and its role in structuring the production and dissemination of knowledge. The primary justification of patenting in science and technology is consequentialist in nature. Patenting should incentivize research and thereby promote the development of knowledge, which in turn facilitates social progress. Some have disputed this argument, maintaining that patenting actually inhibits knowledge production. In this paper, I make a stronger argument; in some areas of research in the US--in particular, research on GM seeds--patents and patent licenses can be, and are in fact being, used to prohibit some research. I discuss three potential solutions to this problem: voluntary agreements, eliminating patents, and a research exemption. I argue against eliminating patents, and I show that while voluntary agreements and a research exemption could be helpful, they do not sufficiently address the problems of access that are discussed here. More extensive changes in the organization of research are necessary.
科学哲学中一个日益重要的话题是研究组织的认知影响。本文确定了一种有前景的社会认识论方法——非理想系统设计，并运用它来考察研究组织的一个重要方面，即专利与许可制度及其在构建知识生产与传播过程中的作用。科技领域专利的主要正当理由本质上是结果主义的。专利应激励研究，从而促进知识发展，进而推动社会进步。一些人对这一观点提出了质疑，认为专利实际上抑制了知识生产。在本文中，我提出了一个更有力的观点；在美国的一些研究领域——特别是转基因种子研究——专利和专利许可能够且实际上正在被用于禁止某些研究。我讨论了这个问题的三种潜在解决方案：自愿协议、取消专利和研究豁免。我反对取消专利，并且表明虽然自愿协议和研究豁免可能会有所帮助，但它们并未充分解决这里所讨论的获取问题。研究组织需要进行更广泛的变革。
