Re: Fighting the wrong enemy

Loren Muldowney (loscott@envsci.rutgers.EDU)
Sun, 12 Sep 1999 07:44:00 -0700

> Nevertheless, I believe the real insight is the distinction between
> those who assess risks in a technical sense, versus those whose decisions
> are reached based on moral/ethical grounds. This gap cannot be bridged by
> more research alone, because one side presents more and more scientific
> research they believe is convincing, while the other side presents a moral
> argument that they believe is convincing, and neither side addresses the
> other's concerns.

Well said and worth repeating. And the "scientific" side has earned the
distrust of the other by its bullying, to the detriment of science in
the mind of the public, I believe, in the following way.

The sales force for the scientific side continues to insist on how
objective its take, how external, how APOLITICAL. Apparently it is
blind to the fact that the position of wanting to use risk assessment
rather than make a coherent argument on other grounds, and the idea that
those who are more convinced by ethical arguments are nevertheless to be
forced to accept risk assessment methodology applied to them, is of
itself a highly political and non-scientific position. This point is
not, of course, lost upon anyone else.

LM

To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".

All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail