Listening without prejudice? Re-discovering the value of the disinterested citizen
Listening without prejudice? Re-discovering the value of the disinterested citizen
复制标题
DOI：
10.1177/0306312707076602
复制
发表时间：
2007-12-01
影响因子：
3
通讯作者：
Plows, Alexandra
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Evans, Robert;Plows, Alexandra
公众参与技术决策越来越被认为是必要的，但这种参与的局限性和目的仍然存在争议。在本文中，我们探讨了扩大参与的不同理由之间的紧张关系，并研究了它们对其实践的影响。以英国关于医学基因组学的辩论为例，我们认为更多的异质性参与和辩论有可能改善代议制民主国家内对科学的审查和问责。在此过程中，我们还认为，有必要对不同参与者特有的专业知识或缺乏专业知识的情况进行更系统、更严格的处理，以取代“非专业知识”的语言。借鉴柯林斯和埃文斯（Collins & Evans，2002）的理论工作，我们区分了需要专家知识并且辩论在公共领域而不是公众本身进行的过程，以及需要和重视非专家非专业公民观点的过程。采用这种方法的效果是允许对“技术”进行更具包容性的处理，同时也为非专家公民在科学的民主控制和监督中发挥积极作用。
Public participation in technological decision-making is increasingly seen as de rigueur, but the limits and purpose of such participation remain open to debate. In this paper we explore the tension between different rationales for widening participation and examine their implications for its practice. Taking debates about medical genomics in the UK as an illustrative example, we argue that more heterogeneous participation and debate have the potential to improve the scrutiny and accountability of science within representative democracies. In doing so we also argue that it is necessary to replace the language of 'lay expertise' with a more systematic and rigorous treatment of the expertise or its absence that characterizes different participants. Drawing on the theoretical work of Collins & Evans ( 2002), we distinguish between those processes where expert knowledge is required and debate is conducted within the public domain, rather than by the public itself, and those where the views of non-expert lay citizens are needed and valued. The effect of adopting this approach is to permit a more inclusive treatment of the 'technical' while also providing a positive role for non-expert citizens in the democratic control and oversight of science.