And if you endorse such actions by Dr. Hansen(如果你赞同汉森博士的说法), can you criticize them when the scientist/advocate stakes an entirely different ideological or economic position? In 2007, on the C-Span program “Close Up at the Newseum(聚焦资讯博物馆),” I asked Patrick J. Michaels, a climatologist working with the Cato Institute who unabashedly labels his work “ advocacy science,” just what that phrase means. He offered a defense reaching back to Thomas Jefferson’s encouragement of scientists to be citizens.
In the end, many people in this arena insist, the science frames the discussion, providing the best picture of consequences and opportunities while laying out ranges of risk and uncertainty. In its 21 years, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change(政府气候变化专门委员会) has played a unique role in facilitating just that framing, many panel members and experts on science and policy say.
But in the end, I hear again and again, science doesn’t have a role in telling society what to do. If only things were that simple. Kenneth Caldeira, a climate specialist whom I’ve interviewed about ocean acidification(海洋酸化), geo-engineering(地质工程学), climate tipping points(气候剧变点) and other questions, says there is substantial peril in “describing policy prescriptions as if they’re a scientific conclusion.”
He bases his thinking on some fundamentals of philosophy, as laid out by David Hume long ago. “You can’t get an ought from an is,(你不能仅从事实的描述中推出我们现实中应该做什么)” Dr. Caldeira told me.
【[科技前沿]气候问题上,气候专家究竟扮演怎样的角色?】相关文章:
最新
2017-05-08
2017-02-10
2017-02-10
2016-11-03
2016-11-03
2016-11-03