Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||Concerning the politicization of climate science: epistemic dependency, trust in expert testimony, and determining What We Ought to Believe|
|Keywords:||anthropogenic climate change;scientific skepticism;ethics of belief;epistemic trust;epistemic dependence;moral authority;social epistemology;feminist theory|
|Abstract:||Belief in climate change does not divide into a simple dichotomy of (good) believers and (evil) nonbelievers. An unclear view of skepticism arises when the differences between empirical and normative claims are revealed. Developing responsible beliefs on matters of which we possess no expertise requires reliable expert testimony. However, trust and objectivity are integral factors for belief in expert consensus. A reduction in public opinion regarding the reliability of climate science, due to politicization, enables the dismissal anthropogenic climate change. Understanding politicization from both Pielke and Douglas clarifies a negative role that politics can play in the doing of science. The risks that politicization pose, mistrust for one, do not undermine the necessary role of values in science. The role of values within scientific enquiry must be restricted and acknowledged for trustworthy science to be produced, and for scientific findings regarding climate change to be accepted by nonexperts, including policymakers.|
|Appears in Collections:||Interdisciplinary Humanities- Master's Theses|
Files in This Item:
|HEPPNER, Caitlin -- MA Thesis -- Concerning the Politicization of Climate Science (1).pdf||566.66 kB||Adobe PDF|
Items in LU|ZONE|UL are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.