Literature DB >> 28939945

Fairness in Knowing: Science Communication and Epistemic Justice.

Fabien Medvecky1.   

Abstract

Science communication, as a field and as a practice, is fundamentally about knowledge distribution; it is about the access to, and the sharing of knowledge. All distribution (science communication included) brings with it issues of ethics and justice. Indeed, whether science communicators acknowledge it or not, they get to decide both which knowledge is shared (by choosing which topic is communicated), and who gets access to this knowledge (by choosing which audience it is presented to). As a result, the decisions of science communicators have important implications for epistemic justice: how knowledge is distributed fairly and equitably. This paper presents an overview of issues related to epistemic justice for science communication, and argues that there are two quite distinct ways in which science communicators can be just (or unjust) in the way they distribute knowledge. Both of these paths will be considered before concluding that, at least on one of these accounts, science communication as a field and as a practice is fundamentally epistemically unjust. Possible ways to redress this injustice are suggested.

Keywords:  Distributive justice; Epistemic justice; Ethics; Science communication

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28939945     DOI: 10.1007/s11948-017-9977-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics        ISSN: 1353-3452            Impact factor:   3.525


  12 in total

Review 1.  The GM public debate: context and communication strategies.

Authors:  Rosie Hails; Julian Kinderlerer
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 53.242

2.  Bringing values and deliberation to science communication.

Authors:  Thomas Dietz
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2013-08-12       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  What's next for science communication? Promising directions and lingering distractions.

Authors:  Matthew C Nisbet; Dietram A Scheufele
Journal:  Am J Bot       Date:  2009-09-03       Impact factor: 3.844

4.  Informing, involving or engaging? Science communication, in the ages of atom-, bio- and nanotechnology.

Authors:  Monika Kurath; Priska Gisler
Journal:  Public Underst Sci       Date:  2009-09

5.  What conceptions of science communication are espoused by science research funding bodies?

Authors:  Sarah E Palmer; Renato A Schibeci
Journal:  Public Underst Sci       Date:  2014-07

Review 6.  Neurotalk: improving the communication of neuroscience research.

Authors:  Judy Illes; Mary Anne Moser; Jennifer B McCormick; Eric Racine; Sandra Blakeslee; Arthur Caplan; Erika Check Hayden; Jay Ingram; Tiffany Lohwater; Peter McKnight; Christie Nicholson; Anthony Phillips; Kevin D Sauvé; Elaine Snell; Samuel Weiss
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2009-12-02       Impact factor: 34.870

7.  'Ignorance is bliss sometimes': constraints on the emergence of the 'informed patient' in the changing landscapes of health information.

Authors:  Flis Henwood; Sally Wyatt; Angie Hart; Julie Smith
Journal:  Sociol Health Illn       Date:  2003-09

8.  Mapping public engagement with research in a UK University.

Authors:  Ann Grand; Gareth Davies; Richard Holliman; Anne Adams
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-04-02       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Communication gap: the disconnect between what scientists say and what the public hears.

Authors:  Charles W Schmidt
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 9.031

10.  Why should we promote public engagement with science?

Authors:  Jack Stilgoe; Simon J Lock; James Wilsdon
Journal:  Public Underst Sci       Date:  2014-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.