• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Studies in history and philosophy of science >Severe weather event attribution: Why values won't go away
【24h】

Severe weather event attribution: Why values won't go away

机译：恶劣天气事件归属：为什么价值不会消失

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

We start by reviewing the complicated situation in methods of scientific attribution of climate change to extreme weather events. We emphasize the social values involved in using both so-called '' storyline '' and ordinary probabilistic or '' risk-based '' methods, noting that one important virtue claimed by the storyline approach is that it features a reduction in false negative results, which has much social and ethical merit, according to its ad-vocates. This merit is critiqued by the probabilistic, risk-based, opponents, who claim the high ground; the usual probabilistic approach is claimed to be more objective and more '' scientific '', under the grounds that it reduces false positive error. We examine this mostly-implicit debate about error, which apparently mirrors the old Jeffrey-Rudner debate. We also argue that there is an overlooked component to the role of values in science: that of second-order inductive risk, and that it makes the relative role of values in the two methods different from what it first appears to be. In fact, neither method helps us to escape social values, and be more scientifically '' objective '' in the sense of being removed or detached from human values and interests. The probabilistic approach does not succeed in doing so, contrary to the claims of its proponents. This is important to understand, because neither method is, fundamentally, a successful strategy for climate scientists to avoid making value judgments.
机译：我们首先审查气候变化科学归属方法的复杂情况，以至于极端天气事件。我们强调了使用所谓的“故事情节”和普通概率或“基于风险的”方法所涉及的社会价值观，并指出故事情节方法所称的一个重要美德是它具有假阴性结果的减少根据其特征，这具有很大的社会和道德优点。这一优点是由概率，基于风险的，对手的批评，他声称高地;通常的概率方法被声称更客观更具“科学”，在它的理由下，它会降低误报误差。我们研究了关于错误的主要隐含辩论，显然镜像旧的Jeffrey-Rudner辩论。我们还认为，科学价值的角色有一个被忽视的组成部分：二阶归纳风险的作用，并且它使得这两种方法的相对作用与它所第一次不同的方法不同。事实上，任何方法都没有帮助我们逃避社会价值，并在被移除或从人类价值观和利益中拆除的意义上更科学地“目标”。概率方法并没有成功地这样做，与其支持者的索赔相反。这是理解的重要性，因为任何方法都没有，从根本上讲，气候科学家的成功战略，以避免判断价值。

著录项

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