Social constructionism and climate science denial
- PDF / 553,781 Bytes
- 27 Pages / 439.37 x 666.142 pts Page_size
- 42 Downloads / 182 Views
(2020) 10:37
PAPER IN GENERAL PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Open Access
Social constructionism and climate science denial Sven Ove Hansson 1 Received: 7 November 2019 / Accepted: 17 August 2020/ # The Author(s) 2020
Abstract It has been much debated whether epistemic relativism in academia, for instance in the form of social constructivism, the strong programme, deconstructionism, and postmodernism, has paved the way for the recent upsurge in science denial, in particular climate science denial. In order to provide an empirical basis for this discussion, an extensive search of the social science literature was performed. It showed that in the 1990s, climate science was a popular target among academic epistemic relativists. In particular, many STS scholars used it as an allegedly clear example of claims by natural scientists that should be treated as mere social constructions, rather than as reports on the actual state of the natural world. A few connections between social constructivists and corporate science denialism were also uncovered, but the extent of such connections could not be determined. With few exceptions, the stream of criticism of climate science from academic relativists has dwindled since the 1990s. One reason for this seems to be that the contrarian position lost its attraction when it became associated with corporate and right-wing propagandists. Keywords Climate science denialism . Epistemic relativism . Social constructivism .
Postmodernism . Strong programme . Science and technology studies
1 Introduction In the last few decades, we have seen a remarkable rise of politically influential science denialism, directed in particular at climate and environmental science.1 Business interests have had a substantial role in funding these attacks on science (Oreskes and 1
On the various claims made by climate science denialists, see McCright and Dunlop (2000), Hansson (2017a) and Cann and Raymond (2018). Unless otherwise stated, in this article “climate science denialism” refers to denial of the overwhelming scientific evidence of a significant ongoing anthropogenic greenhouse effect that will have serious negative effects on the future climate.
* Sven Ove Hansson [email protected]
1
Division of Philosophy, Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), Teknikringen 76, 100 44 Stockholm, Sweden
37
Page 2 of 27
European Journal for Philosophy of Science
(2020) 10:37
Conway 2010). Many commentators have also claimed that academics promoting various forms of epistemic relativism paved the way for science denialism. The criticism has targeted traditions such as social constructivism, the strong programme, deconstructionism, postmodernism, and major parts of Science and Technology Studies (STS).2 All of these traditions harbour sceptical views on the knowledge claims of natural science, and they have all been accused of providing the (anti)intellectual tools used by science denialists to vilify climate and environmental science. Already in 2004, Bruno Latour, a leading STS scholar, deplored that argument patterns of
Data Loading...
