民主与大众对科学的怀疑

IF 4.5 1区 社会学 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Junyan Jiang, Kinman Wan
{"title":"民主与大众对科学的怀疑","authors":"Junyan Jiang, Kinman Wan","doi":"10.1353/wp.2023.a908774","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"abstract: Since the Age of Enlightenment, many thinkers and philosophers have viewed democracy and science as two aspects of modernity that reinforce each other. This article highlights a tension between the two by arguing that certain aspects of contemporary democracy may aggravate the mass public's anti-intellectual tendency and thus potentially hinder scientific progress. The authors analyze a new global survey of public opinion on science using empirical strategies that exploit cross-country and cross-cohort variations in experience with democracy, and show that less-educated citizens in democracies distrust science much more than do their counterparts in nondemocracies. Further analyses suggest that the increase in skepticism in democracies is not the result of greater religiosity or weaker scientific literacy; instead, it is more likely driven by a shift in the mode of legitimation, which reduces states' ability and willingness to act as key public advocates for science. These findings shed light on the institutional sources of science-bashing in many longstanding democracies.","PeriodicalId":48266,"journal":{"name":"World Politics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Democracy and Mass Skepticism of Science\",\"authors\":\"Junyan Jiang, Kinman Wan\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/wp.2023.a908774\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"abstract: Since the Age of Enlightenment, many thinkers and philosophers have viewed democracy and science as two aspects of modernity that reinforce each other. This article highlights a tension between the two by arguing that certain aspects of contemporary democracy may aggravate the mass public's anti-intellectual tendency and thus potentially hinder scientific progress. The authors analyze a new global survey of public opinion on science using empirical strategies that exploit cross-country and cross-cohort variations in experience with democracy, and show that less-educated citizens in democracies distrust science much more than do their counterparts in nondemocracies. Further analyses suggest that the increase in skepticism in democracies is not the result of greater religiosity or weaker scientific literacy; instead, it is more likely driven by a shift in the mode of legitimation, which reduces states' ability and willingness to act as key public advocates for science. These findings shed light on the institutional sources of science-bashing in many longstanding democracies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48266,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"World Politics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"World Politics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/wp.2023.a908774\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Politics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/wp.2023.a908774","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自启蒙时代以来,许多思想家和哲学家将民主与科学视为现代性的两个方面,它们相互促进。这篇文章强调了两者之间的紧张关系,认为当代民主的某些方面可能会加剧大众的反智倾向,从而可能阻碍科学进步。作者分析了一项新的全球公众对科学的看法调查,使用了实证策略,利用了各国和不同群体的民主经验差异,结果表明,民主国家受教育程度较低的公民比非民主国家的公民更不信任科学。进一步的分析表明,民主国家怀疑论的增加并不是更虔诚的宗教信仰或更弱的科学素养的结果;相反,它更有可能是由合法化模式的转变所驱动的,这种转变降低了国家作为科学关键公众倡导者的能力和意愿。这些发现揭示了许多长期民主国家抨击科学的制度根源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Democracy and Mass Skepticism of Science
abstract: Since the Age of Enlightenment, many thinkers and philosophers have viewed democracy and science as two aspects of modernity that reinforce each other. This article highlights a tension between the two by arguing that certain aspects of contemporary democracy may aggravate the mass public's anti-intellectual tendency and thus potentially hinder scientific progress. The authors analyze a new global survey of public opinion on science using empirical strategies that exploit cross-country and cross-cohort variations in experience with democracy, and show that less-educated citizens in democracies distrust science much more than do their counterparts in nondemocracies. Further analyses suggest that the increase in skepticism in democracies is not the result of greater religiosity or weaker scientific literacy; instead, it is more likely driven by a shift in the mode of legitimation, which reduces states' ability and willingness to act as key public advocates for science. These findings shed light on the institutional sources of science-bashing in many longstanding democracies.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
World Politics
World Politics Multiple-
CiteScore
8.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: World Politics, founded in 1948, is an internationally renowned quarterly journal of political science published in both print and online versions. Open to contributions by scholars, World Politics invites submission of research articles that make theoretical and empirical contributions to the literature, review articles, and research notes bearing on problems in international relations and comparative politics. The journal does not publish articles on current affairs, policy pieces, or narratives of a journalistic nature. Articles submitted for consideration are unsolicited, except for review articles, which are usually commissioned. Published for the Princeton Institute for International and Regional Affairs
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信