首页> 外文期刊>Perspectives on science >Facing the Credibility Crisis of Science: On the Ambivalent Role of Pluralism in Establishing Relevance and Reliability
【24h】

Facing the Credibility Crisis of Science: On the Ambivalent Role of Pluralism in Establishing Relevance and Reliability

机译:面对科学的可信度危机:论多元论在建立相关性和可靠性中的歧义作用

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Science at the interface with society is regarded with mistrust among parts of the public. Scientific judgments on matters of practical concern are not infrequently suspected of being incompetent and biased. I discuss two proposals for remedying this deficiency. The first aims at strengthening the independence of science and suggests increasing the distance to political and economic powers. The drawback is that this runs the risk of locking science in an academic ivory tower. The second proposal favors “counter-politicization” in that research is strongly focused on projects “in the public interest,” that is, on projects whose expected results will benefit all those concerned by these results. The disadvantage is that the future use of research findings cannot be delineated reliably in advance. I argue that the underlying problem is the perceived lack of relevance and reliability and that pluralism is an important step toward its solution. Pluralism serves to stimulate a more inclusive research agenda and strengthens the well-testedness of scientific approaches. However, pluralism also prevents the emergence of clear-cut practical suggestions. Accordingly, pluralism is part of the solution to the credibility crisis of science, but also part of the problem. In order for science to be suitable as a guide for practice, the leeway of scientific options needs to be narrowed – in spite of uncertainty in epistemic respect. This reduction can be achieved by appeal to criteria that do not focus on the epistemic credentials of the suggestions but on their appropriateness in practical respect.
机译:与社会交往的科学在公众之间是不信任的。很少有人怀疑对实际问题的科学判断是不称职和有偏见的。我讨论了两个纠正这种缺陷的建议。第一个目标是加强科学的独立性,并建议增加与政治和经济力量的距离。缺点是,这冒着将科学锁定在学术象牙塔中的风险。第二项建议赞成“反政治化”,因为研究主要集中在“符合公共利益”的项目上,即研究预期结果将使所有受这些结果影响的人受益的项目。缺点是无法可靠地预先划定研究结果的未来用途。我认为根本的问题是人们认为缺乏相关性和可靠性,而多元化是解决这一问题的重要一步。多元化有助于激发更具包容性的研究议程,并加强科学方法的久经考验。但是,多元化也阻止了明确实用的建议的出现。因此,多元化是解决科学信誉危机的一部分,也是问题的一部分。为了使科学适合作为实践指南,尽管认知方面存在不确定性,但仍需缩小科学选择的余地。可以通过不遵循建议的认知证据而不是建议在实际方面的适当性的标准来实现这种减少。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Perspectives on science》 |2017年第4期|439-464|共26页
  • 作者

    Martin Carrier;

  • 作者单位

    Bielefeld University;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

  • 入库时间 2022-08-18 02:24:01

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号