魔鬼与深海之间：埃克森瓦尔迪兹漏油案诉讼中的客观性与政治责任

IF 1.5 3区社会学 Q2 ANTHROPOLOGY

Critique of Anthropology Pub Date : 2020-10-12 DOI:10.1177/0308275X20959420

S. Kirsch

{"title":"魔鬼与深海之间：埃克森瓦尔迪兹漏油案诉讼中的客观性与政治责任","authors":"S. Kirsch","doi":"10.1177/0308275X20959420","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectivity is widely recognized as a fundamental value in the sciences. Yet objectivity may be deployed as a filter or screen that discourages scientists from reflecting on the political consequences of their work. This article examines the relationship between scientific commitment to objectivity and recent critiques of the influence of corporations on research. It does so by analysing legal documents and examples of ‘life writing’, including a prominent environmental sociologist’s candid reflections on his decision to consult for Exxon after 1989 Valdez oil spill in Alaska. The article considers how objectivity may facilitate participation in research intended to promote doubt and uncertainty about the harm caused by corporations. It asks whether such decisions are better understood as unavoidable blind spots or examples of wilful blindness.","PeriodicalId":46784,"journal":{"name":"Critique of Anthropology","volume":"40 1","pages":"403 - 419"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0308275X20959420","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Between the devil and the deep blue sea: Objectivity and political responsibility in the litigation of the Exxon Valdez oil spill\",\"authors\":\"S. Kirsch\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/0308275X20959420\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objectivity is widely recognized as a fundamental value in the sciences. Yet objectivity may be deployed as a filter or screen that discourages scientists from reflecting on the political consequences of their work. This article examines the relationship between scientific commitment to objectivity and recent critiques of the influence of corporations on research. It does so by analysing legal documents and examples of ‘life writing’, including a prominent environmental sociologist’s candid reflections on his decision to consult for Exxon after 1989 Valdez oil spill in Alaska. The article considers how objectivity may facilitate participation in research intended to promote doubt and uncertainty about the harm caused by corporations. It asks whether such decisions are better understood as unavoidable blind spots or examples of wilful blindness.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46784,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critique of Anthropology\",\"volume\":\"40 1\",\"pages\":\"403 - 419\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-10-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0308275X20959420\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critique of Anthropology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/0308275X20959420\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critique of Anthropology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0308275X20959420","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 9

摘要

客观被广泛认为是科学的基本价值。然而，客观性可能被用作过滤器或屏障，阻止科学家反思其工作的政治后果。本文考察了科学对客观性的承诺与最近对公司对研究影响的批评之间的关系。本书通过分析法律文件和“生活写作”的例子，包括一位杰出的环境社会学家对他在1989年阿拉斯加瓦尔迪兹石油泄漏事件后决定为埃克森公司提供咨询的坦率反思。本文考虑了客观性如何促进参与旨在促进对公司造成的损害的怀疑和不确定性的研究。它问，这样的决定是被理解为不可避免的盲点，还是故意视而不见的例子更好。

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

Between the devil and the deep blue sea: Objectivity and political responsibility in the litigation of the Exxon Valdez oil spill

Objectivity is widely recognized as a fundamental value in the sciences. Yet objectivity may be deployed as a filter or screen that discourages scientists from reflecting on the political consequences of their work. This article examines the relationship between scientific commitment to objectivity and recent critiques of the influence of corporations on research. It does so by analysing legal documents and examples of ‘life writing’, including a prominent environmental sociologist’s candid reflections on his decision to consult for Exxon after 1989 Valdez oil spill in Alaska. The article considers how objectivity may facilitate participation in research intended to promote doubt and uncertainty about the harm caused by corporations. It asks whether such decisions are better understood as unavoidable blind spots or examples of wilful blindness.

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

Critique of Anthropology ANTHROPOLOGY-

CiteScore

3.50

自引率

8.30%

发文量

期刊介绍： Critique of Anthropology is dedicated to the development of anthropology as a discipline that subjects social reality to critical analysis. It publishes academic articles and other materials which contribute to an understanding of the determinants of the human condition, structures of social power, and the construction of ideologies in both contemporary and past human societies from a cross-cultural and socially critical standpoint. Non-sectarian, and embracing a diversity of theoretical and political viewpoints, COA is also committed to the principle that anthropologists cannot and should not seek to avoid taking positions on political and social questions.