In recent political debates there has been a significant change in the valence of the word “experts” from a superlative to a near pejorative, typically accompanied by a recitation of experts’ many failures and misdeeds. In topics as varied as Brexit, climate change and vaccinations there is a palpable mistrust of experts and a tendency to dismiss their advice. Are we witnessing, therefore, the “death of expertise,” or is the handwringing about an “assault on science” merely the hysterical reaction of threatened elites?
In this new book, Gil Eyal argues that what needs to be explained is not a one-sided “mistrust of experts” but the two-headed pushmi-pullyu of unprecedented reliance on science and expertise, on the one hand, coupled with increased suspicion, skepticism and dismissal of scientific findings, expert opinion or even whole branches of investigation, on the other. The current mistrust of experts, Eyal argues, is best understood as one more spiral in an on-going, recursive crisis of legitimacy. The “scientization of politics,” of which critics warned in the 1960s, has brought about a politicization of science, specifically of regulatory and policy science, and the two processes reinforce one another in an unstable, crisis-prone mixture. Eyal demonstrates that the strategies designed to respond to the crisis - from an increased emphasis on inclusion of laypeople and stakeholders in scientific research and regulatory decision-making to approaches seeking to generate trust by relying on objective procedures such as randomized controlled trials (RCTs) – end up exacerbating the crisis, while undermining and contradicting one another.
This timely book will be of great interest to students and scholars in the social sciences and to anyone concerned about the political uses of, and attacks on, scientific knowledge and expertise.
具体描述
读后感
身处在美国，经历这场COVID-19 pandemic绝对帮助我理解这本书。 1. 在读这本书之前，我看过作者在AJS上发表的题为For a Sociology of Expertise: The Social Origins of the Autism Epidemic。这篇文章帮助我很快理解这本书的前面几个章节，尤其是关于什么expertise，expertise...
评分身处在美国，经历这场COVID-19 pandemic绝对帮助我理解这本书。 1. 在读这本书之前，我看过作者在AJS上发表的题为For a Sociology of Expertise: The Social Origins of the Autism Epidemic。这篇文章帮助我很快理解这本书的前面几个章节，尤其是关于什么expertise，expertise...
评分身处在美国，经历这场COVID-19 pandemic绝对帮助我理解这本书。 1. 在读这本书之前，我看过作者在AJS上发表的题为For a Sociology of Expertise: The Social Origins of the Autism Epidemic。这篇文章帮助我很快理解这本书的前面几个章节，尤其是关于什么expertise，expertise...
评分身处在美国，经历这场COVID-19 pandemic绝对帮助我理解这本书。 1. 在读这本书之前，我看过作者在AJS上发表的题为For a Sociology of Expertise: The Social Origins of the Autism Epidemic。这篇文章帮助我很快理解这本书的前面几个章节，尤其是关于什么expertise，expertise...
评分身处在美国，经历这场COVID-19 pandemic绝对帮助我理解这本书。 1. 在读这本书之前，我看过作者在AJS上发表的题为For a Sociology of Expertise: The Social Origins of the Autism Epidemic。这篇文章帮助我很快理解这本书的前面几个章节，尤其是关于什么expertise，expertise...
用户评价
重读讲legitimation crisis的那一章，感觉是真的很佩服。援引gift里面时间性的概念连接Habermas和Luhmann真的很巧妙！不知道到底怎么才能做到有这种创造力化解理论上的冲突。另外作者文笔真的很好......非英语母语的人怎么能做到这样的。以及risk这一章其实对专家怎么应对不确定性进行了很好的剖析，还蛮能帮助理解这次疫情里面各路专家的争论、各国出台的意见的。
评分重读讲legitimation crisis的那一章，感觉是真的很佩服。援引gift里面时间性的概念连接Habermas和Luhmann真的很巧妙！不知道到底怎么才能做到有这种创造力化解理论上的冲突。另外作者文笔真的很好......非英语母语的人怎么能做到这样的。以及risk这一章其实对专家怎么应对不确定性进行了很好的剖析，还蛮能帮助理解这次疫情里面各路专家的争论、各国出台的意见的。
评分重读讲legitimation crisis的那一章，感觉是真的很佩服。援引gift里面时间性的概念连接Habermas和Luhmann真的很巧妙！不知道到底怎么才能做到有这种创造力化解理论上的冲突。另外作者文笔真的很好......非英语母语的人怎么能做到这样的。以及risk这一章其实对专家怎么应对不确定性进行了很好的剖析，还蛮能帮助理解这次疫情里面各路专家的争论、各国出台的意见的。
评分重读讲legitimation crisis的那一章，感觉是真的很佩服。援引gift里面时间性的概念连接Habermas和Luhmann真的很巧妙！不知道到底怎么才能做到有这种创造力化解理论上的冲突。另外作者文笔真的很好......非英语母语的人怎么能做到这样的。以及risk这一章其实对专家怎么应对不确定性进行了很好的剖析，还蛮能帮助理解这次疫情里面各路专家的争论、各国出台的意见的。
评分重读讲legitimation crisis的那一章，感觉是真的很佩服。援引gift里面时间性的概念连接Habermas和Luhmann真的很巧妙！不知道到底怎么才能做到有这种创造力化解理论上的冲突。另外作者文笔真的很好......非英语母语的人怎么能做到这样的。以及risk这一章其实对专家怎么应对不确定性进行了很好的剖析，还蛮能帮助理解这次疫情里面各路专家的争论、各国出台的意见的。
相关图书
本站所有内容均为互联网搜索引擎提供的公开搜索信息，本站不存储任何数据与内容，任何内容与数据均与本站无关，如有需要请联系相关搜索引擎包括但不限于百度，google,bing,sogou 等
© 2025 book.wenda123.org All Rights Reserved. 图书目录大全 版权所有