Denying the Existence of Consensus or Denying its Probative Value? A Critique of McIntyre’s Proposal Concerning Science Denial
- Autores
- Cormick, Claudio Javier; Edelsztein, Valeria Carolina
- Año de publicación
- 2024
- Idioma
- inglés
- Tipo de recurso
- artículo
- Estado
- versión publicada
- Descripción
- In this article, we try to argue, against McIntyre’s proposal in How to talk to a science denier, that there is a relevant difference between various forms of science denialism. Specifically, we contend that there is a significant distinction to be made between those forms of denialism which deny the existence of an expert consensus (the model of which is the strategy of the tobacco companies in the 1950s) and those which deny the probatory value of such expert consensus (on the basis, e.g., of conspiracy theories involving scientists). While McIntyre and others advocate for the value of communicating consensus as an effective and perfectly rational strategy against those forms of denialism which deceivingly deny the existence of scientific agreement, we argue that this approach becomes question-begging against those which deny its probatory value. Accordingly, then, we object to McIntyre’s characterization that “all science denial is basically the same” and suggest a more nuanced understanding of the phenomenon.
Fil: Cormick, Claudio Javier. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Instituto de Investigaciones Filosóficas. - Sociedad Argentina de Análisis Filosófico. Instituto de Investigaciones Filosóficas; Argentina
Fil: Edelsztein, Valeria Carolina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Centro de Formación e Investigación en Enseñanza de las Ciencias; Argentina - Materia
-
SCIENCE DENIAL
TOBACCO STRATEGY
AGW DENIAL
FLAT-EARTHERISM
ANTI-VAXXERISM
MCINTYRE, LEE - Nivel de accesibilidad
- acceso abierto
- Condiciones de uso
- https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ar/
- Repositorio
- Institución
- Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
- OAI Identificador
- oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/260785
Ver los metadatos del registro completo
id |
CONICETDig_3add942c1ac838898e8ac97c736e8697 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/260785 |
network_acronym_str |
CONICETDig |
repository_id_str |
3498 |
network_name_str |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
spelling |
Denying the Existence of Consensus or Denying its Probative Value? A Critique of McIntyre’s Proposal Concerning Science DenialCormick, Claudio JavierEdelsztein, Valeria CarolinaSCIENCE DENIALTOBACCO STRATEGYAGW DENIALFLAT-EARTHERISMANTI-VAXXERISMMCINTYRE, LEEhttps://purl.org/becyt/ford/6.3https://purl.org/becyt/ford/6In this article, we try to argue, against McIntyre’s proposal in How to talk to a science denier, that there is a relevant difference between various forms of science denialism. Specifically, we contend that there is a significant distinction to be made between those forms of denialism which deny the existence of an expert consensus (the model of which is the strategy of the tobacco companies in the 1950s) and those which deny the probatory value of such expert consensus (on the basis, e.g., of conspiracy theories involving scientists). While McIntyre and others advocate for the value of communicating consensus as an effective and perfectly rational strategy against those forms of denialism which deceivingly deny the existence of scientific agreement, we argue that this approach becomes question-begging against those which deny its probatory value. Accordingly, then, we object to McIntyre’s characterization that “all science denial is basically the same” and suggest a more nuanced understanding of the phenomenon.Fil: Cormick, Claudio Javier. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Instituto de Investigaciones Filosóficas. - Sociedad Argentina de Análisis Filosófico. Instituto de Investigaciones Filosóficas; ArgentinaFil: Edelsztein, Valeria Carolina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Centro de Formación e Investigación en Enseñanza de las Ciencias; ArgentinaUniversidade Federal de Santa Catarina2024-08info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/11336/260785Cormick, Claudio Javier; Edelsztein, Valeria Carolina; Denying the Existence of Consensus or Denying its Probative Value? A Critique of McIntyre’s Proposal Concerning Science Denial; Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina; Principia; 28; 2; 8-2024; 321-3511808-1711CONICET DigitalCONICETenginfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/principia/article/view/93904info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.5007/1808-1711.2024.e93904info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ar/reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas2025-09-29T09:51:41Zoai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/260785instacron:CONICETInstitucionalhttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/oai/requestdasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:34982025-09-29 09:51:41.327CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicasfalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Denying the Existence of Consensus or Denying its Probative Value? A Critique of McIntyre’s Proposal Concerning Science Denial |
title |
Denying the Existence of Consensus or Denying its Probative Value? A Critique of McIntyre’s Proposal Concerning Science Denial |
spellingShingle |
Denying the Existence of Consensus or Denying its Probative Value? A Critique of McIntyre’s Proposal Concerning Science Denial Cormick, Claudio Javier SCIENCE DENIAL TOBACCO STRATEGY AGW DENIAL FLAT-EARTHERISM ANTI-VAXXERISM MCINTYRE, LEE |
title_short |
Denying the Existence of Consensus or Denying its Probative Value? A Critique of McIntyre’s Proposal Concerning Science Denial |
title_full |
Denying the Existence of Consensus or Denying its Probative Value? A Critique of McIntyre’s Proposal Concerning Science Denial |
title_fullStr |
Denying the Existence of Consensus or Denying its Probative Value? A Critique of McIntyre’s Proposal Concerning Science Denial |
title_full_unstemmed |
Denying the Existence of Consensus or Denying its Probative Value? A Critique of McIntyre’s Proposal Concerning Science Denial |
title_sort |
Denying the Existence of Consensus or Denying its Probative Value? A Critique of McIntyre’s Proposal Concerning Science Denial |
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv |
Cormick, Claudio Javier Edelsztein, Valeria Carolina |
author |
Cormick, Claudio Javier |
author_facet |
Cormick, Claudio Javier Edelsztein, Valeria Carolina |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Edelsztein, Valeria Carolina |
author2_role |
author |
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv |
SCIENCE DENIAL TOBACCO STRATEGY AGW DENIAL FLAT-EARTHERISM ANTI-VAXXERISM MCINTYRE, LEE |
topic |
SCIENCE DENIAL TOBACCO STRATEGY AGW DENIAL FLAT-EARTHERISM ANTI-VAXXERISM MCINTYRE, LEE |
purl_subject.fl_str_mv |
https://purl.org/becyt/ford/6.3 https://purl.org/becyt/ford/6 |
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv |
In this article, we try to argue, against McIntyre’s proposal in How to talk to a science denier, that there is a relevant difference between various forms of science denialism. Specifically, we contend that there is a significant distinction to be made between those forms of denialism which deny the existence of an expert consensus (the model of which is the strategy of the tobacco companies in the 1950s) and those which deny the probatory value of such expert consensus (on the basis, e.g., of conspiracy theories involving scientists). While McIntyre and others advocate for the value of communicating consensus as an effective and perfectly rational strategy against those forms of denialism which deceivingly deny the existence of scientific agreement, we argue that this approach becomes question-begging against those which deny its probatory value. Accordingly, then, we object to McIntyre’s characterization that “all science denial is basically the same” and suggest a more nuanced understanding of the phenomenon. Fil: Cormick, Claudio Javier. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Instituto de Investigaciones Filosóficas. - Sociedad Argentina de Análisis Filosófico. Instituto de Investigaciones Filosóficas; Argentina Fil: Edelsztein, Valeria Carolina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Centro de Formación e Investigación en Enseñanza de las Ciencias; Argentina |
description |
In this article, we try to argue, against McIntyre’s proposal in How to talk to a science denier, that there is a relevant difference between various forms of science denialism. Specifically, we contend that there is a significant distinction to be made between those forms of denialism which deny the existence of an expert consensus (the model of which is the strategy of the tobacco companies in the 1950s) and those which deny the probatory value of such expert consensus (on the basis, e.g., of conspiracy theories involving scientists). While McIntyre and others advocate for the value of communicating consensus as an effective and perfectly rational strategy against those forms of denialism which deceivingly deny the existence of scientific agreement, we argue that this approach becomes question-begging against those which deny its probatory value. Accordingly, then, we object to McIntyre’s characterization that “all science denial is basically the same” and suggest a more nuanced understanding of the phenomenon. |
publishDate |
2024 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2024-08 |
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/11336/260785 Cormick, Claudio Javier; Edelsztein, Valeria Carolina; Denying the Existence of Consensus or Denying its Probative Value? A Critique of McIntyre’s Proposal Concerning Science Denial; Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina; Principia; 28; 2; 8-2024; 321-351 1808-1711 CONICET Digital CONICET |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/11336/260785 |
identifier_str_mv |
Cormick, Claudio Javier; Edelsztein, Valeria Carolina; Denying the Existence of Consensus or Denying its Probative Value? A Critique of McIntyre’s Proposal Concerning Science Denial; Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina; Principia; 28; 2; 8-2024; 321-351 1808-1711 CONICET Digital CONICET |
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/principia/article/view/93904 info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.5007/1808-1711.2024.e93904 |
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ar/ |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ar/ |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET) instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
reponame_str |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
collection |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
instname_str |
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
dasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.ar |
_version_ |
1844613587721519104 |
score |
13.070432 |