Везде
Otto Neurath's relevance for science policy debates
Table of contents
Annotation Estimate Publication content
References Comments
Share
QR
Metrics
Otto Neurath's relevance for science policy debates
Annotation
PII
S1811-833X0000617-8-1
Publication type
Article
Status
Published
Authors
Reiner Grundmann 
Edition
Volume 57 Issue 4
Pages
138-157
Abstract
Debates about the role of science in policy making have highlighted the uneasy relationship between knowledge and decision making. Recent high-profile examples include climate change and the Covid-19 pandemic. On the one hand there is an intertwinement between facts and values. On the other hand, there is a tension between the acknowledgement of scientific uncertainty and the justification of political action. This sometimes finds political solutions that are perceived as unsound and unsatisfactory. Some perceive the policies as too weak, some as too strong. Both appeal to fundamental values such as health, wealth, security, freedom, equality, or solidarity. In this article I will argue that we need a more open debate about these issues and a deeper understanding of what is at issue in science policy debates. I shall do so by referring to a Neurathian framework. Neurath’s legacy survives mainly in the history and philosophy of science but is largely forgotten in policy studies and sociology. This needs rectifying, especially in light of the fact that he anticipated central insights that have been attributed to later authors such as Fleck and Kuhn. The paper has the following structure. I first provide some historical and intellectual context by looking at the Vienna Circle and some biographical background about Neurath’s views, and his political engagement. I then examine his epistemology, especially his view of science and the social sciences, leading to his anti-foundationalism. Finally, I turn to the public policy literature which has produced results that partly overlap with, and partly contradict Neurath’s views.
Keywords
Neurath, climate science, policy making, IPCC, scientific uncertainty, scientific consensus
Date of publication
01.12.2020
Number of purchasers
11
Views
388
Readers community rating
0.0 (0 votes)
Cite Download pdf

References



Additional sources and materials

1. Beck, U. Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. London: Sage, 1992. 
2. Bush, V. Science: the Endless Frontier. Washington D.C., 1945. 
3. Caplan, N. “The Two-Communities Theory and Knowledge Utilization”, American Behavioral Scientist, 1979, vol. 22 (3), pp. 459-470. 
4. Cartwright, N., J. Cat, L. Fleck, T.E. Uebel. (eds.) Otto Neurath. Philosophy Between Science and Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. 
5. Demortain, D. “Expertise, Regulatory Science and the Evaluation of Technology and Risk: Introduction to the Special Issue”, Minerva, 2017, vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 139-159. 
6. Esping-Andersen, G. The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1990. 
7. Fuller, S. Thomas Kuhn: A Philosophical History for Our Times. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2000. 
8. Funtowicz, S.O. and Ravetz, J.R. “Science for the Post-Normal Age”, Futures, 1993, vol. 25(7), pp. 735-755. 
9. Godin, B. “The Linear Model of Innovation. The Historical Construction of an Analytical Framework”, Science, Technology, and Human Values, 2006, vol. 31, pp. 639-667. 
10. Grundmann, R. Making Sense of Expertise. New York, NY: Routledge, 2021. (in print) 
11. Grundmann, R., and Stehr, N. The Power of Scientific Knowledge: From Research to Public Policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2021. 
12. Grundmann, R.“The Rightful Place of Expertise”, Social Epistemology, 2018, vol. 32(6), pp. 372-86. 
13. Habermas, J. “Technology and Science as Ideology”, in: Toward a Rational Society: Student Protest, Science, and Politics, Boston: Beacon Press, 1971, pp. 81-122. 
14. Hajer, M.A. The Politics of Environmental Discourse: Ecological Modernization and the Policy Process. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995. 
15. Hall, Peter A. 1989. The Political Power of Economic Ideas: Keynesianism across Nations. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. 
16. Hall, P.A., and Soskice, D. Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001. 
17. Heclo, H. “Issue Networks and the Executive Establishment”, The Oxford Handbook of Classics in Public Policy and Administration (June 2020), pp. 1-12. 
18. Hegselmann, R. “Otto Neurath-Empirischer Aufklärer Und Sozialreformer”, in: Otto Neurath. Wissenschaftliche Weltauffassung, Sozialismus Und Logischer Empirismus. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp, 1979, pp. 7-78. 
19. Hernes, G. “The Interface Between Social Research and Policy Making.”, European Sociological Review, 2008, vol. 24(2): 257-65. 
20. Hulme, M. Why We Disagree About Climate Change: Understanding Controversy, Inaction and Opportunity. Cambridge University Press, 2009. 
21. Ibarra, A. and Mormann, T. 2003. “Engaged Scientific Philosophy in the Vienna Circle: The Case of Otto Neurath”, Technology in Society, 2003, vol. 25, pp. 235-47. 
22. Irwin, A. Citizen Science: A Study of People, Expertise and Sustainable Development. London: Routledge, 1995. 
23. Jasanoff, S. The Fifth Branch: Science Advisers as Policymakers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1990. 
24. Lakatos, I. Proofs and Refutations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976. 
25. Lasswell, H. and Kaplan, A. Power and Society: A Framework for Political Inquiry. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1950. 
26. Lindblom, C. “The Science of‘Muddling Through’”, Public Adinistration Review, 1959, vol. 19, pp. 79-88. 
27. Lindblom, C.E. 1979. “Still Muddling, Not Yet Through”, Public Administration Review, 1979, vol. 39(6), p. 517. 
28. Luhmann, N. Social Systems. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1995. 
29. March, J.G. and Simon, H.A. Organizations. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1958. 
30. McGuinness, B.F. 1987. Unified Science: The Vienna Circle Monograph Series Originally Edited by Otto Neurath, Now in an English Edition. Dordrecht: Reidel, 1987. 
31. Neurath, O. “Probleme Der Kriegswirtschaftslehre”, Zeitschrift für die gesamte Staatswissenschaft, 1913, vol. 69(3), pp. 438-501. 
32. Neurath, O. “Soziologie Im Physikalismus”, Erkenntnis, 1931, vol. 2(1), pp. 393-431. 
33. Neurath, O. Einheitswissenschaft und Psychologie. Wien: Gerold & Co, 1933. 
34. O’Neill, J. “Unified Science as Political Philosophy: Positivism, Pluralism and Liberalism”, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part, 1933, A 34(3), pp. 575-96. 
35. Pielke Jr., R. The Honest Broker. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007. 
36. Popper, K.R. The Logic of Scientific Discovery. London: Hutchinson, 1959. 
37. Popper, K.R. The Poverty of Historicism. London: Routledge, 1960. 
38. Rhodes, R.A.W. and March, D. “New Directions in the Study of Policy Networks”, European Journal of Political Research, 1992, vol. 21(1-2), pp.181-205. 
39. Sarewitz, D. “How Science Makes Environmental Controversies Worse” Environmental Science and Policy, 2004, vol. 7(5), pp. 385-403. 
40. Skocpol, T. States and Social Revolutions: A Comparative Analysis of France, Russia, and China. Cambridge University Press, 1979. 
41. Stehr, N. Knowledge Societies. London: Sage, 1994. 
42. Strassheim, H., and Kettunen, P. “When Does Evidence-Based Policy Turn into Policy-Based Evidence Configurations, Contexts and Mechanisms”, Evidence and Policy, 2014, vol. 10(2), pp. 259-77. 
43. Uebel, T. Vernunftkritik Und Wissenschaft. Otto Neurath Und Der Erste Wiener Kreis. New York, NY: Springer, 2000. 
44. Varoufakis, Y. Adults In The Room: My Battle With Europe’s Deep Establishment. London: Penguin, 2017. 
45. Weber, M. “Politik Als Beruf (1919)”, in:H.-P. Müller and S. Sigmund (eds.) Max Weber-Handbuch: Leben - Werk - Wirkung. Stuttgart: J.B. Metzler, 2020, pp. 265-70. 
46. Weber, M.“Wissenschaft Als Beruf (1917/1919)”, in: H.-P. Müller and S. Sigmund (eds.) Max Weber-Handbuch: Leben - Werk - Wirkung. Stuttgart: J.B. Metzler, 2020, pp. 259-64. 
47. Wynne, B. “Misunderstood Misunderstanding: Social Identities and Public Uptake of Science”, Public Understanding of Science, 1992, vol. 1, pp. 281-304. 
48. Zolo, D. Reflexive Epistemology. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 1989.

Comments

No posts found

Write a review
Translate