Jacqueline Mae Wallis

Here I draw on a recent movement in preclinical biomedical research – use of what are often called “dirty mice” – to challenge the standard view that less controlled experiments have diminished epistemic power. Dirty mice are research mice with diverse microbial exposures, and dirty mouse methods, I argue, are strategies for loosening the control that researchers have over their experiments. I use recent experimental results to show why, as compared to conventional mouse models, dirty mice may better support the translation of findings from laboratories to human clinical contexts. I discuss how to evaluate the claim that dirty mice, as compared to conventional mice, both (a) more closely match relevant human features and (b) more accurately predict human responses (to drugs and interventions). Thus, contra the control ideal, deliberately relinquishing some experimental control improves an epistemic desideratum (in this case, translatability). This paper contributes to literature on the philosophy of experiment, and the final upshot will be a suggestion for when scientists in other fields might consider purposely designing less controlled experiments.

There have been increasing calls to improve the integration of local expertise into both scientific research and evidence-based policy development, especially for urgent problems like climate change. There are both epistemic and ethical benefits of better involving local communities in these knowledge-generating processes. Here we present a community science process model for integrating the expertise of local communities, developed through field analysis of a community science endeavor in the Galápagos Islands. We call this kind of collaboration “embedded ecology.” The process of embedded ecology is modeled by what we call the Partnership Flywheel, which includes phases for ideation, planning, implementation, and learning. The importance of sustained collaboration between external practitioners and a local community cannot be overstated, which is one reason the flywheel is iterative, allowing the focus to be on sustained project generation and improvement. After discussing the practical elements of the Partnership Flywheel process model, we argue that its simplicity and replicability are essential for any process model aimed at improving the integration of local expertise in community science, thereby addressing both current and enduring challenges in the field. In sum, we present and explore a new community science process model thus advancing a recently growing literature on the theory of participatory research.

Life cycle diagrams are ubiquitous in a variety of scientific materials, ranging from introductory biology textbooks to professional publications. These diagrams typically depict stages of a particular organism’s life connected by arrows, such as, for a frog: egg(s) → embryo → tadpole → tadpole with two legs → tadpole with four legs → young frog → adult frog → egg(s). In this paper, we present a critique of this sort of life cycle diagram, drawing on both metaphysics and epistemology of science. We suggest that these diagrams do not accurately represent an organism’s life stages, its reproduction, or species persistence. These misrepresentations have implications for scientific reasoning, explanatory efficacy, as well as pedagogical efficacy. To address the shortcomings of these diagrams, we propose a new kind of diagram which we call the life spiral diagram. The life spiral diagram more accurately reflects an organism’s life stages, its reproduction, as well as species persistence. Thus, the life spiral diagram better aids scientific reasoning, explanations of life processes, and learning.

In 2020, the University of Pennsylvania instituted a graduate certificate in public philosophy. In many ways, this certificate formalized and recognized the public engagement work that graduate students in the philosophy department and beyond had been involved with for some years. One element of the certificate, however, was pivotal in moving our work in public philosophy forward in important ways. This element is the research seminar in public philosophy. In this paper, we recount the motivation for the creation of the certificate and especially the motivation for the inclusion of the research seminar. We also explore ways in which such a certificate, along with the deliberately self-reflective work of the research seminar, might help us reimagine the nature and value of philosophy and its connection with human life and flourishing. We focus on metaphilosophical themes such as the very nature of philosophy and the philosopher as well as the importance of cultivating a new generation of academic philosophers committed to transcending the distinction between the academy and the public and, relatedly, between academic philosophy and public philosophy.

As reproductive genetic technologies advance, families have more options to choose what sort of child they want to have. Using preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), for example, allows parents to evaluate several existing embryos before selecting which to implant via in vitro fertilization (IVF). One of the traits PGD can identify is genetic deafness, and hearing embryos are now preferentially selected around the globe using this method. Importantly, some Deaf families desire a deaf child, and PGD–IVF is also an option for them. Selection for genetic deafness, however, encounters widespread disapproval in the hearing community, including mainstream philosophy and bioethics. In this paper I apply Elizabeth Barnes’ value-neutral model of disability as mere-difference to the case of selecting for deafness. I draw on evidence from Deaf Studies and Disability Studies to build an understanding of deafness, the Deaf community, and the circumstances relevant to reproductive choices that may obtain for some Deaf families. Selection for deafness, with deafness understood as mere-difference and valued for its cultural identity, need not necessitate impermissible moral harms. I thus advocate that it is sometimes morally permissible to select for deafness in one’s child.