后真理与“遵循科学”的修辞

IF 0.4 3区社会学 Q4 POLITICAL SCIENCE

Critical Review Pub Date : 2023-04-03 DOI:10.1080/08913811.2023.2231782

J. Russell, Dennis Patterson

{"title":"后真理与“遵循科学”的修辞","authors":"J. Russell, Dennis Patterson","doi":"10.1080/08913811.2023.2231782","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Populists are often cast as deniers of rationality, creators of a climate of “post-truth,” and valuing tribe over truth and the rigors of science. Their critics claim the authority of rationality and empirical facts. Yet the critics no less than populists enable an environment of spurious claims and defective argumentation. This is especially true in the realm of science. An important case study is the account of scientific trust offered by a leading public intellectual and historian of science, Naomi Oreskes, and the misapplication of that theory during the coronavirus pandemic.","PeriodicalId":51723,"journal":{"name":"Critical Review","volume":"35 1","pages":"122 - 147"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Post-Truth and the Rhetoric of “Following the Science”\",\"authors\":\"J. Russell, Dennis Patterson\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/08913811.2023.2231782\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Populists are often cast as deniers of rationality, creators of a climate of “post-truth,” and valuing tribe over truth and the rigors of science. Their critics claim the authority of rationality and empirical facts. Yet the critics no less than populists enable an environment of spurious claims and defective argumentation. This is especially true in the realm of science. An important case study is the account of scientific trust offered by a leading public intellectual and historian of science, Naomi Oreskes, and the misapplication of that theory during the coronavirus pandemic.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51723,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical Review\",\"volume\":\"35 1\",\"pages\":\"122 - 147\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/08913811.2023.2231782\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08913811.2023.2231782","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

民粹主义者经常被塑造成理性的否认者，“后真相”氛围的创造者，重视部落而不是真理和科学的严谨性。他们的批评者声称理性和经验事实的权威。然而，与民粹主义者一样，批评者创造了一种虚假主张和有缺陷论证的环境。在科学领域尤其如此。一个重要的案例研究是著名公共知识分子和科学历史学家内奥米·奥雷斯克斯(Naomi Oreskes)对科学信任的描述，以及该理论在冠状病毒大流行期间的误用。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Post-Truth and the Rhetoric of “Following the Science”

ABSTRACT Populists are often cast as deniers of rationality, creators of a climate of “post-truth,” and valuing tribe over truth and the rigors of science. Their critics claim the authority of rationality and empirical facts. Yet the critics no less than populists enable an environment of spurious claims and defective argumentation. This is especially true in the realm of science. An important case study is the account of scientific trust offered by a leading public intellectual and historian of science, Naomi Oreskes, and the misapplication of that theory during the coronavirus pandemic.

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

Critical Review POLITICAL SCIENCE-

CiteScore

1.30

自引率

12.50%

发文量

期刊介绍： Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society is a political-science journal dedicated to advancing political theory with an epistemological bent. Recurrent questions discussed in our pages include: How can political actors know what they need to know to effect positive social change? What are the sources of political actors’ beliefs? Are these sources reliable? Critical Review is the only journal in which the ideational determinants of political behavior are investigated empirically as well as being assessed for their normative implications. Thus, while normative political theorists are the main contributors to Critical Review, we also publish scholarship on the realities of public opinion, the media, technocratic decision making, ideological reasoning, and other empirical phenomena.