Evaluating Science and Risk: Living With and Dying From Asbestos
Evaluating Science and Risk: Living With and Dying From Asbestos
复制标题
评估科学和风险：与石棉一起生活和死于石棉
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2005
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
L. Waldman
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
L. Waldman
最近的科学和技术研究研究了风险概念和公众对科学的理解如何在非西方背景下有用(Fairhead和Leach，2003)。道格拉斯和威尔达夫斯基(1983)在科学知识如何嵌入到文化背景中并与之相互作用方面做了开创性的工作，他们认为，理解风险需要意识到社会文化背景以及主观和个人因素的知识。韦恩的解释主义方法也侧重于语境，并提供了一种重新审视更传统的、实证主义的调查方法来了解公众对科学的理解的方法(Wynne，1995)。他的工作引起了人们对“正式”和“非正式”专业知识之间的互动的关注，展示了在坎布里亚丘陵地带，牧羊人是如何与物理学家互动的。他还提请人们注意风险的关系维度，他问道，普通人可以在多大程度上参与形成科学知识，从而为反映和维持对人类以及公共知识的社会目的的不同主导概念的不同形式的公共知识提供基础。(Wynne 1996：61)最近，Furedi在他的论点中强调了语境的中心地位，即对未来的恐惧与对当今问题的焦虑有关。如果对未来感到恐惧，那么对风险的反应更有可能强调不利结果的可能性“(Furedi 2002：18)。
Recent Science and Technology Research has examined how concepts of risk and public understandings of science might be useful in nonWestern contexts (Fairhead and Leach 2003). Pioneering work on how scientific knowledge is embedded in – and interacts with – a cultural context was done by Douglas and Wildavsky (1983) who argued that understanding risk requires an awareness of the sociocultural context alongside knowledge of subjective and personal factors. Wynne’s interpretationist approach also focuses on context and provides a means to re-examine the more traditionalist, positivist survey approach to public understandings of science (Wynne 1995). His work draws attention to the interaction between ‘formal’ and ‘informal’ forms of expertise, showing how on the Cumbrian fells, sheep farmers interact with physicists. He also draws attention to the relational dimension of risks, asking ‘how far might lay people be involved in shaping scientific knowledge, and thus in providing the basis for alternative forms of public knowledge that reflect and sustain different dominant conceptions of the human, and of the social purposes of public knowledge?’ (Wynne 1996: 61) More recently, Furedi has reinforced the centrality of context in his argument that ‘fears about the future are linked to anxieties about problems today. And if the future is feared, then reaction to risk is more likely to emphasize the probability of adverse outcomes’ (Furedi 2002: 18).