This link has been bookmarked by 1 people . It was first bookmarked on 10 Jan 2008, by Jeremy Price.
-
10 Jan 08
-
empirical research in science and technology studies has found that scientific "truth" does not emerge from an objective and comprehensive consideration of the evidence.
-
Recognizing this does not diminish the value or status of science in society; indeed, such a perspective enables a conversation about the trust we have in scientists to use their expertise to create reliable and useful knowledge.
-
scientific controversy is not just about what is true, but who determines what is true. Moreover, questions about who gets access to that truth and when matter a great deal.
-
all performances are bounded
-
Audience members are not random collections of people
-
an audience plays more than a passive role
-
What matters here is that we avoid the twin traps of thinking of the "public" as undifferentiated and passive during scientific controversy. The metaphor of audience reminds us that multiple audiences can be constructed around scientific performances, and that these audiences have the potential to participate in the creation of what counts as true and why it should matter.
-
Would you like to comment?
Join Diigo for a free account, or sign in if you are already a member.