New Directions
New Directions
As earlier chapters showed, blending of facts and values has deeply embedded intolerance against ADHD in ubiquitous systems. Yet, this chapter argues, we cannot escape the blending of fact and value in our decisions. So how do we reach the goals of reducing intolerance, improving options for diagnosable people, and increasing our knowledge of mental function? These goals require both ethical and epistemic success. We can decide on appropriate actions if we take facts and values into account carefully, and if we conscientiously represent all relevant voices, expert and non-expert—physicians, psychologists, scientists, policy-makers, teachers, employers, parents, affected individuals, and more—in decision making. The chapter recommends a decision-making framework, the Pragmatist framework, to achieve these goals. The chapter suggests as well that we will need to curtail dichotomized thinking and dichotomizing practices, open new branches of research, and opt, more often, for social change over individualized intervention.
Keywords: ADHD, american pragmatism, pragmatist framework, scientific pluralism, values in science, intolerance, science policy, public policy, dichotomization, social change
Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.
To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .
