RationalWiki's 2019 Fundraiser

There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff – we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.

If everyone who saw this today donated $5, we would meet our goal for 2019.

Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with PayPal Logo.png!

Information icon.svg The 2018 moderator election has started! We are electing 6 moderators and 2 alternatives to serve in 2019. Nominate users here and read their campaign slogans here!

Post-normal science

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Ravetz and Funtowicz in 1988
Part of a series on the
Philosophy of science
Icon philosophy of science.svg

Post-normal science is a concept coined by Jerome Ravetz and Silvio Funtowicz to describe fields in which high-cost decisions must be made but there is a good deal of uncertainty with relation to the relevant scientific facts. The phrase "post-normal science" is a spin-off of Thomas Kuhn's concept of "normal science." Ravetz and Funtowicz have mostly applied this concept to ecological economics and public health policy. One of the key components of post-normal science is that it is not value-free, but used in the service of an outcome decided by value judgments (which makes it similar to decision theory in some ways).

Because of this, Ravetz and Funtowicz argue for a "democratization" of scientific knowledge through an "extended peer community" to integrate "local knowledge, values, and interests."[1] The authors feel that these perspectives and "other forms of knowing" have been unfairly excluded from science despite the fact that they're, well, not really scientific, so they'd like to abolish the underlying method and the discrimination between fact and fancy that it entails. This hollowed-out shell would then be stuffed with nonsense, to be legitimized by keeping the description "science" as a mark of "quality." Perhaps they should cut out the middleman and simply call it "post-science"...

Usage by cranks[edit]

The concept has gained some currency in popular discourse recently. Due to its similarities to postmodern critiques of science, it has also been latched onto by cranks attempting to give their ideas a veneer of legitimacy much in the same way that postmodern rhetoric has.

Its most common usage is probably in the arena of global warming, where the term is sometimes bandied about by denialists.[2] It's also been picked up by some creationists.[3] This is especially ironic considering that postmodernism is often a bogeyman for right-wingnuts as well as the fact that post-normal science was coined by leftist academics and discussions revolving around it often read like watered-down Paul Feyerabend or Bruno Latour.

See also[edit]

External links[edit]