Panel 4: “Science Communication, Evidence, and Accountability”

Loading...

Media is loading
 

Start Date

7-12-2024 1:30 PM

End Date

7-12-2024 2:45 PM

Description

A fundamental conflict has emerged since, and because of, COVID over science communication: how should the uncertainty that always exists in science be communicated to the public and used to justify policy? The view of some science communicators is that uncertainty should never be addressed. To do so invite such things as vaccine hesitancy in a public health emergency, conspiracy theories, and proliferation of misinformation. Others argue that this approach endangers, politicizes, and undermines the legitimacy of science. The problem of evidence poses related questions about authority: who is justified in making decisions in the face of radical uncertainty? The response to COVID provides a master class in these conflicts.

Comments

  • Speaker 1: Eric Winsberg, PhD, Professor, Department of Philosophy, USF; British Academy Global Professor, Department of History and Philosophy of Science, University of Cambridge
  • Speaker 2: Joshua Scacco, PhD, Associate Professor, Department of Communication; Director, Center for Sustainable Democracy, USF
  • Panelist: Jason Salemi, PhD, MPH, FACE, Professor, College of Public Health, USF Health
  • Panelist: Martin Kulldorff, PhD, Drhc, Epidemiologist, Biostatistician, Founding Fellow, Academy for Science and Freedom, Hillsdale College
  • Moderator: Stephen Turner, PhD, Distinguished University Professor, Department of Philosophy, USF

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS
 
Dec 7th, 1:30 PM Dec 7th, 2:45 PM

Panel 4: “Science Communication, Evidence, and Accountability”

A fundamental conflict has emerged since, and because of, COVID over science communication: how should the uncertainty that always exists in science be communicated to the public and used to justify policy? The view of some science communicators is that uncertainty should never be addressed. To do so invite such things as vaccine hesitancy in a public health emergency, conspiracy theories, and proliferation of misinformation. Others argue that this approach endangers, politicizes, and undermines the legitimacy of science. The problem of evidence poses related questions about authority: who is justified in making decisions in the face of radical uncertainty? The response to COVID provides a master class in these conflicts.