Journal
SOCIAL STUDIES OF SCIENCE
Volume 47, Issue 5, Pages 751-770Publisher
SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/0306312717731936
Keywords
co-production; expertise; law and science; post-truth; public reason
Categories
Ask authors/readers for more resources
The label post-truth' signals for many a troubling turn away from principles of enlightened government. The word post', moreover, implies a past when things were radically different and whose loss should be universally mourned. In this paper, we argue that this framing of post-truth' is flawed because it is ahistorical and ignores the co-production of knowledge and norms in political contexts. Debates about public facts are necessarily debates about social meanings, rooted in realities that are subjectively experienced as all-encompassing and complete, even when they are partial and contingent. Facts used in policy are normative in four ways: They are embedded in prior choices of which experiential realities matter, produced through processes that reflect institutionalized public values, arbiters of which issues are open to democratic contestation and deliberation, and vehicles through which polities imagine their collective futures. To restore truth to its rightful place in democracy, governments should be held accountable for explaining who generated public facts, in response to which sets of concerns, and with what opportunities for deliberation and closure.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available