|
|
|
||
|
The global COVID pandemic had a paradoxical impact on the general public's perception of scientific knowledge. On the one hand, the vaccine proved to be an effective solution, demonstrating the capacity of medical sciences to address challenges in a prompt and efficacious manner. Conversely, from the outset of the epidemic, there was an unparalleled conflict and debate surrounding scientific expertise, encompassing the safety of mRNA vaccines, unconventional medication, and the impact of lockdowns. It is notable that scientists engaged in public debate with one another, which gave rise to the question of whether the public should place trust in science when scientists themselves could not reach consensus.
It is evident that public debates over the credibility of science and scientists are not a novel phenomenon. However, the circumstances under which such debates are conducted are undergoing a period of significant transformation. In particular, social media has been identified as a significant conduit for the dissemination of misinformation and the incitement of discord, both within science and about science. This seminar will challenge this view by investigating the relation between scientists, media and the public, and examining the various constellations in which scientific credibility is asserted and contested. Focusing on 20th and 21st centuries this seminar will examine the ways in which the virtues of modern science, including critical thinking and the recognition that current truths may be superseded by future developments, are conveyed to create specific representations of science. The question thus arises as to how science presents itself as a robust institution when there is a clear divergence of opinion amongst scholars. How is this dissent discussed in the public domain? Which role do political actors play in the process of securing and challenging scientific unity? What becomes of the dissenters (see pseudo-science or "cancel culture")? These and other questions will be discussed on the basis of international case studies. Poslední úprava: Surman Jan Jakub, Dr. phil. (29.01.2025)
|
|
||
|
Students will be acquainted with current discussions concerning scientific credibility and trust in science. This aims at enhancing the competence in critical thinking and critical analysis of media discussions concerning science and its results. At the practical level the course will teach and/or revise crucial scholarly competences, making bibliographies, searching for (reliable) information, writing abstracts, formulating scholarly arguments and hypotheses, and finding sources to sustain or refute them.
The seminar is aimed at students on any level of education from any background. The course is interdisciplinary. It does not require prior knowledge of history of science/science studies/philosophy of science/science communication, although it will touch all these fields. Poslední úprava: Surman Jan Jakub, Dr. phil. (29.01.2025)
|
|
||
|
Regular participation (20%), participation in group discussions (29%), (timely!) completion of oral and written tasks (51%) Poslední úprava: Surman Jan Jakub, Dr. phil. (30.01.2025)
|
|
||
|
Recommended literature
Andrew Jewett, Science under Fire: Challenges to Scientific Authority in Modern America (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard university press, 2020). Maya J. Goldenberg, Vaccine Hesitancy: Public Trust, Expertise, and the War on Science, Science, Values, and the Public (Pittsburgh, Pa: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2021). Michael D. Gordin, Pseudoscience: A Very Short Introduction, Very Short Introductions (New York (N.Y.): Oxford University press, 2023) Naomi Oreskes and Erik M. Conway, Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming (New York: Bloomsbury, 2010). Naomi Oreskes, Why Trust Science? With a New Preface by the Author (Princeton Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2021). Poslední úprava: Surman Jan Jakub, Dr. phil. (30.01.2025)
|
|
||
|
Mix of discussions of pre-circulated texts and other audio-visual materials, practice-oriented group discussions and tasks, short student presentations. Language: English, several other languages allowed for written tasks Poslední úprava: Surman Jan Jakub, Dr. phil. (30.01.2025)
|
|
||
|
1. Introduction
2. Science&Pseudoscience Nick Spencer: Where does science end and pseudoscience begin? In conversation with Michael Gordin, Reading Our Times, May 31, 2022 (URL: https://readingourtimes.podigee.io/29-new-episode , 11.01.2025) 3. Understanding science: Butter or Margarine
“Explaining inconsistencies in nutritional research”, Science News, Date13 October 2022 (URL: https://www.leeds.ac.uk/news-science/news/article/5165/explaining-inconsistencies-in-nutritional-research, 11.01.2025) Anthony Hennen: “The Credibility Issue in Nutrition Science Is a Sign for All of Higher Ed”, The James G. Martin Center for Academic Renewal, November 27, 2019 (URL: https://www.jamesgmartin.center/2019/11/the-credibility-issue-in-nutrition-science-is-a-sign-for-all-of-higher-ed/, 11.01.2025)
4. From tobacco to climate change: Doubting science Robert Kenner (dir.) Merchants of Doubt (2014) and/or
Naomi Oreskes et al., “The Denial of Global Warming,” in The Palgrave Handbook of Climate History, ed. Sam White, Christian Pfister, and Franz Mauelshagen (London: Palgrave Macmillan UK, 2018), 149–71, https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-43020-5_14.
5. Doubting vaccination before COVID Maya J. Goldenberg; Public Misunderstanding of Science? Reframing the Problem of Vaccine Hesitancy. Perspectives on Science 2016; 24 (5): 552–581. doi: https://doi.org/10.1162/POSC_a_00223 (URL: https://www.mayagoldenberg.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Goldenberg-Public-Misunderstanding-of-Science.pdf, 11.01.2025) And/or Maya J. Goldenberg, Vaccine Hesitancy: Public Trust, Expertise, and the War on Science, Science, Values, and the Public (Pittsburgh, Pa: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2021).
6. Trust within sciences
Maya J. Goldenberg, Vaccine Hesitancy: Public Trust, Expertise, and the War on Science, Science, Values, and the Public (Pittsburgh, Pa: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2021), 111–37.
7. Trust in scientists / Sciences on screen (Will be decided together with seminar participants depending on knowledge of popular culture.)
Possible reading: Margaret A. Weitekamp, “The Image of Scientists in The Big Bang Theory,” Physics Today 70, no. 1 (January 1, 2017): 40–48, https://doi.org/10.1063/PT.3.3427.
8. Trust in (science) entrepreneurs
Alex Gibney (dir.) The Inventor: Out for Blood in Silicon Valley (2019)
9. Communicating science (discussion of chapters of the book) Introduction plus a chosen chapter from Toss Gascoigne et al., eds., Communicating Science: A Global Perspective (Canberra, ACT, Australia: Australian National University Press, 2020).
10. Internationalising (particular) science Lilian Calles Barger, Audra J. Wolfe: [Discussion of ] Audra J. Wolfe, Freedom’s Laboratory: The Cold War Struggle for the Soul of Science (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2018), New Bookd Network, December 27, 2018 (URL: https://newbooksnetwork.com/audra-j-wolfe-freedoms-laboratory-the-cold-war-struggle-for-the-soul-of-science-johns-hopkins-up-2018/, 11.01.2025)
Michael D. Gordin: Is Science Political? The Cold War invention of scientific neutrality. Boston Review, August 21, 2019 (URL: https://www.bostonreview.net/articles/michael-d-gordin-science-political/, 11.01.2025) 11. Trust in science in history Andrew Jewett, How Americans Came to Distrust Science, Boston Review, December 8, 2020 (URL: https://www.bostonreview.net/articles/andrew-jewett-science-under-fire/, 11.01.2025)
12. Conclusions Poslední úprava: Surman Jan Jakub, Dr. phil. (30.01.2025)
|