• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Minerva >The Political Philosophy of Science Policy
【24h】

The Political Philosophy of Science Policy

机译：科学政策的政治哲学

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

The tensions between modern science and democracy have created a variety of political dilemmas: science symbolizes and promotes liberal-democratic values such as transparency, skepticism, and collective problem-solving, and yet also challenges these values through its exclusivity and elitism. Science contributes to the wealth and security upon which modern democracy depends, and yet also produces technological risks. Science helps make politics and policy more rational and effective, but is used to exclude those deemed irrational, and to restrict democratic procedures thought ineffective. During much of the postwar period, these tensions were held in check by what is commonly called a 'social science' received generous funding and wide-reaching freedom from political control in exchange for medical, military, and consumer technologies. In recent decades, however, the 'contract' has become the subject of careful scrutiny, and the tensions between science and democracy have come to play a central role in the daily politics of advanced industrial societies. Today, it appears to some that these tensions are being resolved in favour of democracy, as scientists are held accountable-not only to the standards of scientific disciplines and research institutions, but also to the ethical, legal, and political demands of the wider society. However, many such requirements incorporate a managerial ethos, and are criticized for consisting of little more than cost-cutting measures. As such, they represent a distinctly neo-liberal form of democratization that has little to do with public participation or collective decision-making, and in fact threatens more robust forms of democratic politics.
机译：现代科学与民主之间的紧张关系造成了各种政治困境：科学象征并促进了自由民主的价值观，如透明度，怀疑主义和集体解决问题的能力，同时也通过其排他性和精英主义挑战了这些价值观。科学为现代民主所依赖的财富和安全做出了贡献，但同时也产生了技术风险。科学有助于使政治和政策更加合理和有效，但被用来排除那些被认为不合理的政治和政策，并限制被认为无效的民主程序。在战后的大部分时间里，通常被称为“社会科学”的这些紧张局势都得到了遏制，这些社会科学获得了慷慨的资助和广泛的政治自由，以换取医疗，军事和消费技术。然而，近几十年来，“合同”已成为仔细审查的主题，科学与民主之间的紧张关系已在先进工业社会的日常政治中发挥着核心作用。如今，某些人似乎正在解决这些紧张局势，转而支持民主，因为科学家不仅要对科学学科和研究机构的标准负责，而且还要对更广泛社会的道德，法律和政治要求负责。但是，许多这样的要求都包含了管理精神，并且被批评为仅包含削减成本的措施。因此，它们代表了一种明显的新自由主义形式的民主化，与公众参与或集体决策无关，实际上威胁了更强大的民主政治形式。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Minerva》 |2004年第1期|p. 77-95|共19页
  • 作者

    Mark B. Brown;

  • 作者单位

    Department of Government, California State University, 6000 J Street, Sacramento, CA 95819, USA;

  • 收录信息 美国《科学引文索引》(SCI);
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 文化理论;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号