ABSTRACT
This crossing boundaries section addresses the substantial aspects at stake in reshaping the nexus between science, politics and society triggered by the Covid-19 pandemic. In this regard, three main dimensions are explored: first, the emerging forms of science-related populism and how political narratives challenge and dispute prevailing scientific knowledge;second, the platformization of science communication and the active role of users and communities in consuming and spreading online misinformation;third, the role of lay expertise in contesting the epistemic authority of science during the health emergency. The authors explore the related topics by mobilizing different theoretical frameworks from STS studies, media studies and legal science, also moving from empirical to theoretical level in order to challenge the "surface" of a multilayered phenomenon.
ABSTRACT
Doubt is a double-edge sword. On the one hand, uncertainty is essential for epistemic progress, and yet, doubt can also make us vulnerable to deception, confused to the point of no longer knowing what is true. What distinguishes a doubt that is epistemologically beneficial from one which is deceptive, or even manufactured in the context of a conspiracy theory? In this chapter, we explore doubt, its role, and the way it is being handled in the context of the public controversy about the COVID-19 vaccine. We approach conspiracy theories as argumentative discourses and reconstruct the generic structure of a conspiracy theory macro argument. Through the structure, we look into the discourse of the twelve prominent anti-vaxxers known as the “Disinformation Dozen”, focusing on the argumentative potential that doubt can have in the public controversy about the COVID-19 vaccine. We suggest to distinguish ambivalence from scepticism and denialism as three argumentative potentials that a motivated doubt can have. We argue that ambivalent doubt ought to be acknowledged, addressed and incorporated into the public health narrative, in order to avoid that an unnecessarily broad interpretation of conspiracy theory dominates the public debate and leaves an uncertain public a prey to it. © 2022, The Author(s).
ABSTRACT
Our purpose in this article is to discuss the roles for HPSS in Science Education considering the crisis of COVID-19, as well as to think what Science Education could look like beyond the pandemic. Considering the context of a pandemic as a starting point, we defend in this article the thesis that contours of public controversy involving COVID-19 bring elements that allow us to argue that Science Education needs to embrace perspectives that highlight politics as co-constitutive of science, and not in a subsidiary role to it. To defend this thesis, we begin with a theoretical framework based on arguments of science studies and from exemplary cases from history of science. Then, we analyze some of the public controversies surrounding COVID-19, in its most central aspects, trying to interpret how intertwining between science and politics took place. Brazilian case is analyzed in more details. Finally, based on educational scholarship and considering the previous discussions, we propose some implications for Science Education research and practices, both concerning the role of HPSS in its teaching and discussing critically boundaries of this research field.