1. sheril
  2. UCSD-TV Interview with Naomi Oreskes

UCSD-TV Interview with Naomi Oreskes

By cmooney on May 14, 2006.

While I was out in San Diego last month, I got to do a lengthy interview with science historian Naomi Oreskes for UCSD-TV. UCSD-TV also filmed a keynote speech I did for Planned Parenthood of San Diego and Riverside Counties. The latter hasn't aired yet, but the former is now available online and you can watch it here using RealPlayer. I thought it was a really good, high level discussion. Oreskes had me respond to some criticisms from people like Daniel Sarewitz and the sociology of science crowd, as well as setting the issue of use and misuse of science in its full historical context. I think it went really well, and I hope you'll check it out.

Tags
updates

More like this

GoogleVideo of Mooney/Oreskes Interview
I've just put up a link on the left to the GoogleVideo version of my UCSD-TV interview with Naomi Oreskes, which I think is one of my best interviews. You can watch it here. This is the beginning of my quest to create some sort of YouTube or other archive of videos of some of my appearances. If…
NeuroTV at UCSD
UCSD-TV, the local television station broadcast by the University of California at San Diego, has a series called Grey Matters, which is devoted to neuroscience. To date, fifteen full-length presentations have been produced for the series, all of which are availabe online in RealPlayer at the UCSD…
Online AP science classes -- with lab?
Adventures in Ethics and Science field operative RMD alerted me to a recent article in the New York Times (free registration required) about an ongoing debate on the use of online instruction for Advanced Placement science classes. The crux of the debate is not the value of online science classes…
Monckton claims UCSD told Oreskes to apologize
Last year Christopher Monckton was threatening legal action if Naomi Oreskes did not apologize to Schulte: By making the allegations his own and endorsing them with such lamentably unscientific enthusiasm, however, he has exposed himself to the legal action which may well follow if Oreskes does not…

Good work Chris.

One small quibble - I think Oreskes's scale between 'just a little bit socially constructed' and 'completely socially constructed' could do with a little clarifying. I'm not suggesting it's a willful distortion, just that it oversimplifies the thrust of mainstream science studies:

'[The problem with the term 'social construction'] is that it confers a kind of causal primacy upon the "social" that careful work in [Science and Technology Studies], broadly conceived, has consistently denied. Constructivism does not imply that social reality is ontologically prior to natural reality, nor that social factors alone determine the workings of nature; yet the rubric "social construction" carries such connotations.' from here, p.19

Also, a propos your call for constructivist 'collaboration' with mainstream science a few weeks back, I note this effort from a few weeks back:

Some of the administration's defenders point out that science and politics have always been strained bedfellows. This administration, they insist, is being unfairly singled out for criticism. Sheila Jasanoff, a professor of science and technology studies at Harvard University who investigates the use of science in the federal government, disagrees. "Something different is going on in the Bush administration," she claims. Part of the problem is that it attempts to create controversy where none exists.

Very impressive interview Chris. Skillful, non-confrontational and persuasive. Must help with credibility and winning the argument.

And helps this Londoner feel more connected with, and positive about, what is happening in the US.

Douglas Coker

By Douglas Coker (not verified) on 15 May 2006 #permalink

I think that your continued picking on John Edwards relative to stem cell research is somewhat unfair. In fact, he was just quoting comments made by the late Christopher Reeve.