The Problem of Trust Without Intimacy: Education for Handling Expert Knowledge in a Neoliberal Marketplace

Author:

Smith Dorothy V.

Abstract

Abstract Trust arises from confidence in a person or confidence in the practices of an institution. Theorists argue that institutional trust depends, to varying extents on intrapersonal trust, which is trust between people who know each other. Science rests its claim to expert knowledge on the practices of knowledge production engaged in by its institutions. Most people cannot check these practices themselves and effectively must trust the experts who explain and vouch for those practices of science, and thus, there is an element of intrapersonal trust needed if the laity is to have trust in science. Much of the sociology of science is concerned with democratic exchanges between scientists and other citizens, in which scientists are expected to show a commitment to open-mindedness and transparency, yet this may leave scientists and their knowledge vulnerable to contestation in terms that may undermine trust in their science. In this article, I draw on data generated in a study of Australian scientists to describe the ways in which trust was important in the work of these scientists and consider the consequences for a scientist who is prepared to admit to uncertainty. Drawing upon these data and from media accounts of the COVID-19 vaccination debate in Australia, I argue that science education for contemporary society must equip scientists and the laity for relationships that are more than narrowly cognitive. I argue for an education that makes explicit the ways in which the community of science interacts to produce and verify knowledge, and that equips students to recognise uncertainty and dissent as central to science and value expert knowledge. I suggest approaches that may achieve this goal.

Funder

Australian Research Council

University of New England

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Education

Reference89 articles.

1. Aikenhead, G. S. (2003). Review of Research on Humanistic Perspectives in Science Curricula. Paper presented at the European Science Education Research Association, Noordwijkerhout, The Netherlands. http://www.usask.ca/education/people/aikenhead/ESERA_2.pdf

2. Allchin, D. (2003). Scientific myth-conceptions. Science Education, 87(3), 329–351. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10055

3. Arthur Rylah Institute for Ecological Research. (2021, 28/01/2021). About ARI. Retrieved from https://www.ari.vic.gov.au/about-us/about-ari

4. Australian Academy of Science. (2021, 18 June 2021). How is science funded in Australia: A breakdown of science and research funding by sector. Retrieved from https://www.science.org.au/curious/policy-features/how-science-funded-australia

5. Bencze, L., & Carter, L. (2011). Globalizing students acting for the common good. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(6), 648–669. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20419

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. How the crisis of trust in experts occurs on social media in China? Multiple-case analysis based on data mining;Humanities and Social Sciences Communications;2024-08-27

2. Manifestations of Trust in the Implementation of Civic Tech in Southern Africa;IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology;2023

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3