Assumptions of the Deficit Model Type of Thinking: Ignorance, Attitudes, and Science Communication in the Debate on Genetic Engineering in Agriculture [Book Review]

Abstract
This paper spells out and discusses four assumptions of the deficit model type of thinking. The assumptions are: First, the public is ignorant of science. Second, the public has negative attitudes towards (specific instances of) science and technology. Third, ignorance is at the root of these negative attitudes. Fourth, the public’s knowledge deficit can be remedied by one-way science communication from scientists to citizens. It is argued that there is nothing wrong with ignorance-based explanations per se. Ignorance accounts at least partially for many cases of opposition to specific instances of science and technology. Furthermore, more attention needs to be paid to the issue of relevance. In regard to the evaluation of a scientific experiment, a technology, or a product, the question is not only who knows best?, but also what knowledge is relevant and to what extent?. Examples are drawn primarily from the debate on genetic engineering in agriculture.
Keywords Deficit model  Ignorance  Attitudes  Science communication  Genetic engineering  Nanotechnology
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 9,365
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

View all 10 references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Similar books and articles
Christian J. Peters (2000). Genetic Engineering in Agriculture: Who Stands to Benefit? [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 13 (3-4):313-327.
Andrew Sneddon (2005). Rawlsian Decisionmaking and Genetic Engineering. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 15 (01):35-41.
Rik Peels (2010). What is Ignorance? Philosophia 38 (1):57-67.
Analytics

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2011-04-18

Total downloads

22 ( #65,979 of 1,089,063 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

1 ( #69,801 of 1,089,063 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Start a new thread
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.