Public controversies over issues ranging from global warming to biotechnology have politicized scientific expertise and research. Some respond with calls for restoring a golden age of value-free science. More promising efforts seek to democratize science. But what does that mean? Can it go beyond the typical focus on public participation? How does the politics of science challenge prevailing views of democracy? In Science in Democracy, Mark Brown draws on science and technology studies, democratic theory, and the history of political thought to show why an adequate response to politicized science depends on rethinking both science and democracy. Brown enlists such canonical and contemporary thinkers as Machiavelli, Hobbes, Rousseau, Dewey, and Latour to argue that the familiar dichotomy between politics and science reinforces a similar dichotomy between direct democracy and representative government. He then develops an alternative perspective based on the mutual shaping of participation and representation in both science and politics. Political representation requires scientific expertise, and scientific institutions may become sites of political representation. Brown illustrates his argument with examples from expert advisory committees, bioethics councils, and lay forums. Different institutional venues, he shows, mediate different elements of democratic representation. If we understand democracy as an institutionally distributed process of collective representation, Brown argues, it becomes easier to see the politicization of science not as a threat to democracy but as an opportunity for it. The hardcover edition does not include a dust jacket.
具体描述
读后感
评分
评分
评分
评分
用户评价
三点：一、不预设政治和科学的边界，而来探讨二者的边界究竟在哪里。二、对社会建构理论给出的回应是，与其探讨权力的科学(science of power)还不如探讨科学的权力(power of science)如何在社会多元主体那里进行分配的问题。三、科学与常识的关系必须重新得到理解，科学源于日常生活，专业化和科层化只是将科学发展成理解常识的一种极致形式而已。
评分三点：一、不预设政治和科学的边界，而来探讨二者的边界究竟在哪里。二、对社会建构理论给出的回应是，与其探讨权力的科学(science of power)还不如探讨科学的权力(power of science)如何在社会多元主体那里进行分配的问题。三、科学与常识的关系必须重新得到理解，科学源于日常生活，专业化和科层化只是将科学发展成理解常识的一种极致形式而已。
评分三点：一、不预设政治和科学的边界，而来探讨二者的边界究竟在哪里。二、对社会建构理论给出的回应是，与其探讨权力的科学(science of power)还不如探讨科学的权力(power of science)如何在社会多元主体那里进行分配的问题。三、科学与常识的关系必须重新得到理解，科学源于日常生活，专业化和科层化只是将科学发展成理解常识的一种极致形式而已。
评分三点：一、不预设政治和科学的边界，而来探讨二者的边界究竟在哪里。二、对社会建构理论给出的回应是，与其探讨权力的科学(science of power)还不如探讨科学的权力(power of science)如何在社会多元主体那里进行分配的问题。三、科学与常识的关系必须重新得到理解，科学源于日常生活，专业化和科层化只是将科学发展成理解常识的一种极致形式而已。
评分三点：一、不预设政治和科学的边界，而来探讨二者的边界究竟在哪里。二、对社会建构理论给出的回应是，与其探讨权力的科学(science of power)还不如探讨科学的权力(power of science)如何在社会多元主体那里进行分配的问题。三、科学与常识的关系必须重新得到理解，科学源于日常生活，专业化和科层化只是将科学发展成理解常识的一种极致形式而已。
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