Abstract
Politicization of science is often described as the process of political actors overemphasizing scientific uncertainty to cast doubt on a scientific consensus. We argue that in addition to exploiting the inherent uncertainty of science, actors resort to so-called technical and national arguments to politicize science. Applying the pragmatic sociology of Boltanski and Thévenot and the method of discourse network analysis to Finnish news media debate on forest policy (2015–2020), we analyze the different modes of valuation used by the so-called forestry coalition to defend increased logging and politicize the broad scientific consensus on its harmful environmental impacts. Technical arguments appeal to the common principles of technical efficiency, productivity and expertise, while national arguments invoke shared, cultural ideas of Finnish forestry. We conclude that pragmatic sociology carries considerable potential to improve our understanding of the broader cultural factors that lay the foundation for successful politicization of science.
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
