摘要
I use the example of the 2000 US Presidential election to show that political controversies with technical underpinnings are not resolved by technical means. Then, drawing from examples such as climate change, genetically modified foods, and nuclear waste disposal, I explore the idea that scientific inquiry is inherently and unavoidably subject to becoming politicized in environmental controversies. I discuss three reasons for this. First, science supplies contesting parties with their own bodies of relevant, legitimated facts about nature, chosen in part because they help make sense of, and are made sensible by, particular interests and normative frameworks. Second, competing disciplinary approaches to understanding the scientific bases of an environmental controversy may be causally tied to competing value-based political or ethical positions. The necessity of looking at nature through a variety of disciplinary lenses brings with it a variety of normative lenses, as well. Third, it follows from the foregoing that scientific uncertainty, which so often occupies a central place in environmental controversies, can be understood not as a lack of scientific understanding but as the lack of coherence among competing scientific understandings, amplified by the various political, cultural, and institutional contexts within which science is carried out.
In light of these observations, I briefly explore the problem of why some types of political controversies become “scientized” and others do not, and conclude that the value bases of disputes underlying environmental controversies must be fully articulated and adjudicated through political means before science can play an effective role in resolving environmental problems.
中文摘要
“我以2000年美国总统大选为例，说明以技术为基础的政治争论，不是靠技术手段解决的。然后，从气候变化、转基因食品、核废料处理等例子中，我探讨了这样一个想法： 科学探究本质上不可避免地会在环境争议中变得政治化。我对此讨论了三个原因。首先，科学为竞赛各方提供了他们自己的关于自然的相关的、合法的事实，之所以选择这些事实，部分原因是它们有助于理解，和 由特定利益和规范框架变得明智。其次，理解环境争议的科学基础的竞争性学科方法可能与竞争性的基于价值的政治或伦理立场有因果关系。通过各种学科观察自然的必要性 镜头也带来了各种规范镜头。第三，从上文可以看出，在环境争议中经常占据中心位置的科学不确定性，不能理解为缺乏科学理解，而是缺乏 相互竞争的科学理解之间的连贯性，被开展科学的各种政治、文化和制度背景所放大。鉴于这些观察，我简要探讨了为什么某些类型的政治争论会变得“科学化”而另一些则不会，并得出结论，在科学能够发挥作用之前，必须通过政治手段充分阐明和裁决环境争论背后的争论的价值基础。 为解决环境问题发挥有效作用。”
