One way to make philosophy of science more socially relevant is to attend to specific scientific practises that affect society to a great extent. One such practise is biomedical research. This paper looks at contemporary U.S. biomedical research in particular and argues that it suffers from important epistemic, moral and socio-economic failings. It then discusses and criticises existing approaches to improve on the status quo, most prominently by Thomas Pogge (a political philosopher), Joseph Stiglitz (a Nobel-prize winning economist) and James Robert Brown (a philosopher of science). Finally, it sketches an alternative proposal and argues for its superiority. The proposal has four components: changing the intellectual property regime; instituting independent clinical research; aligning innovators' and patients' interests; and enacting additional regulation.

Biomedical research, Global Justice, John Stuart Mill, Methodology
dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11229-010-9790-7, hdl.handle.net/1765/64401
Synthese
Erasmus School of Philosophy

Reiss, J.P. (2010). In favour of a Millian proposal to reform biomedical research. Synthese, 177(3), 427–447. doi:10.1007/s11229-010-9790-7