Display options
Cite
Medvecky F. Fairness in Knowing: Science Communication and Epistemic Justice. Sci Eng Ethics. 2017;24(5):1393-1408doi: 10.1007/s11948-017-9977-0.
Medvecky, F. (2018). Fairness in Knowing: Science Communication and Epistemic Justice. Science and engineering ethics, 24(5), 1393-1408. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-9977-0
Medvecky, Fabien. "Fairness in Knowing: Science Communication and Epistemic Justice." Science and engineering ethics vol. 24,5 (2018): 1393-1408. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-9977-0
Medvecky F. Fairness in Knowing: Science Communication and Epistemic Justice. Sci Eng Ethics. 2018 Oct;24(5):1393-1408. doi: 10.1007/s11948-017-9977-0. Epub 2017 Sep 22. PMID: 28939945.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Sci Eng Ethics. 2018 Oct;24(5):1393-1408. doi: 10.1007/s11948-017-9977-0. Epub 2017 Sep 22.

Fairness in Knowing: Science Communication and Epistemic Justice.

Science and engineering ethics

Fabien Medvecky

Affiliations

  1. Centre for Science Communication, University of Otago, P.O. Box 56, Dunedin, 9054, New Zealand. [email protected].

PMID: 28939945 DOI: 10.1007/s11948-017-9977-0

Abstract

Science communication, as a field and as a practice, is fundamentally about knowledge distribution; it is about the access to, and the sharing of knowledge. All distribution (science communication included) brings with it issues of ethics and justice. Indeed, whether science communicators acknowledge it or not, they get to decide both which knowledge is shared (by choosing which topic is communicated), and who gets access to this knowledge (by choosing which audience it is presented to). As a result, the decisions of science communicators have important implications for epistemic justice: how knowledge is distributed fairly and equitably. This paper presents an overview of issues related to epistemic justice for science communication, and argues that there are two quite distinct ways in which science communicators can be just (or unjust) in the way they distribute knowledge. Both of these paths will be considered before concluding that, at least on one of these accounts, science communication as a field and as a practice is fundamentally epistemically unjust. Possible ways to redress this injustice are suggested.

Keywords: Distributive justice; Epistemic justice; Ethics; Science communication

References

  1. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013 Aug 20;110 Suppl 3:14081-7 - PubMed
  2. Nat Rev Genet. 2003 Oct;4(10):819-25 - PubMed
  3. Public Underst Sci. 2014 Jul;23(5):511-27 - PubMed
  4. Sociol Health Illn. 2003 Sep;25(6):589-607 - PubMed
  5. PLoS One. 2015 Apr 02;10(4):e0121874 - PubMed
  6. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2010 Jan;11(1):61-9 - PubMed
  7. Environ Health Perspect. 2009 Dec;117(12):A548-51 - PubMed
  8. Am J Bot. 2009 Oct;96(10):1767-78 - PubMed
  9. Public Underst Sci. 2009 Sep;18(5):559-73 - PubMed
  10. Public Underst Sci. 2014 Jan;23(1):4-15 - PubMed
  11. Public Underst Sci. 2014 Jul;23(5):557-73 - PubMed
  12. Science. 2015 Aug 28;349(6251):aac4716 - PubMed

MeSH terms

Publication Types