Coming to grips with scientific ignorance in the governance of endocrine disrupting chemicals and nanoparticles |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Molecular Medicine, IRCCS Stella Maris, Pisa, Italy,;2. Unit of Neurology and Neurometabolic Disorders, Department of Medicine, Surgery and Neurosciences, University of Siena, Italy, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Senese, Siena;3. Unit NINT Neuroimaging and Neurointervention, Department of Neurological and Sensorineural Sciences, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Senese, Siena, Italy;1. Chung Yuan Christian University, Chung-Li 32023, Taiwan, ROC;2. National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taipei 10607, Taiwan, ROC;3. Department of International Business Management, Shih Chien University, Taipei 10462, Taiwan, ROC;4. Department of Business Administration, Chihlee Institute of Technology, Taipei 22050, Taiwan, ROC;5. Departments of Applied Mathematics and Business Administration, Chung Yuan Christian University, Chung-Li 32023, Taiwan, ROC;6. Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Victoria, Victoria, British Columbia V8W 3R4, Canada;1. Thomas Jefferson University Division of Orthopaedic Research, Philadelphia, PA;2. Rothman Institute of Orthopaedics, Philadelphia, PA;3. University Orthopaedic Center, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT |
| |
| Abstract: | New technologies are characterized by various forms of incertitude that challenge both scientific expertise and regulatory action. In this paper, we argue that these incertitudes place experts in irreducible double bind situations, which may end in paralysis. Double binds emerge when primary injunctions are contradicted by secondary injunctions at a different logical level, which affects the interpretation of the primary injunction. Adequately addressing the challenges posed by new technologies requires phronesis, or pragmatic, context-dependent and action-oriented knowledge grounded in value deliberation. Using endocrine disruptors and carbon nanotubes as empirical examples, we argue that in relation to new technologies involving various kinds of incertitude, being phronimos—the person who can do phronesis—involves synthetically and simultaneously enacting parts of the three interrelated domains of knowledge, ethics and institutions, also across different logical levels. The special kind of experience-based phronesic skill that required in the regulatory appraisal of new technologies is thus fundamentally related to the human capacity of pattern recognition. Finally, we argue that being aware of and making full use of practical wisdom thus conceptualized enables a new operationalization of the precautionary principle. |
| |
| Keywords: | New technologies Ignorance Double bind Phronesis |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
