Get our latest essays, archival selections, reading lists, and exclusive content delivered straight to your inbox.
Declining public trust in government and science has recently been thrown into sharp relief, from vaccine skepticism to climate and COVID-19 denialism and QAnon conspiracies. Some observers see an epidemic of bad logic and misinformation, suggesting the culprit is largely a result of poor knowledge and faulty reasoning on the part of individuals. As the essays in this week’s reading list explore, however, this view ignores the crucial role of social and political factors in the making and breaking of public trust.
According to philosophers Catarina Novaes and Silvia Ivani, trust is as much a moral and political matter as an epistemic one. As a result, they argue, we must move beyond the popular “knowledge deficit model” of anti-science sentiment, which posits a one-way relationship between knowledgeable experts and an ignorant public in need of instruction. “In place of the narrow goal of fostering scientific literacy,” they write, “we should look to the broader goal of facilitating cooperation between scientists and citizens.” In a recent forum, science and technology and studies scholar Shelia Jasanoff similarly emphasizes the importance of democracy in solidifying popular trust in public health, calling for “technologies of humility: institutional mechanisms—including greater citizen participation—for incorporating memory, experience, and concerns for justice into our schemes of governance and public policy.”
These issues extend far beyond the realm of science and public health. As intellectual historian Nicolas Guilhot argues, they reflect the current state of politics, which reduces social problems to individual ones. Many have been quick to attribute conspiratorial thinking to what Guilhot calls “bad information,” but movements like QAnon, he contends, express an “existential anxiety” that cannot be reduced to “cognitive deficiencies.” The solution is not widespread fact checking, seminars on logical fallacies, or critiques of “defective epistemology.” Instead we must “address the dearth of political vision on which conspiracism feeds.”
Other essays in this week’s reading list touch on different social and political facets of public trust. Medical doctors Michelle Morse and Bram Wispelwey call attention to “the long legacy of medical injustice perpetrated against communities of color” as a source of distrust in the medical system; historian Andrew Jewett traces the shifting political valence of distrust in science over the course of the twentieth century; and political theorist Matthew Cole examines two arguments against technocracy, calling for a “smart democracy” that empowers citizens to put their knowledge into practice.
The United States ranked first on health security; then came COVID-19. In place of technocratic hubris, we need robust new forms of democratic humility.
Vital reading on politics, literature, and more in your inbox. Sign up for our Weekly Newsletter, Monthly Roundup, and event notifications.
…we need your help. Confronting the many challenges of COVID-19—from the medical to the economic, the social to the political—demands all the moral and deliberative clarity we can muster. In Thinking in a Pandemic, we’ve organized the latest arguments from doctors and epidemiologists, philosophers and economists, legal scholars and historians, activists and citizens, as they think not just through this moment but beyond it. While much remains uncertain, Boston Review’s responsibility to public reason is sure. That’s why you’ll never see a paywall or ads. It also means that we rely on you, our readers, for support. If you like what you read here, pledge your contribution to keep it free for everyone by making a tax-deductible donation.
But I do miss the hymns, / the small, hard apples with their dimpled skin. I do miss / things.
The vast hinterlands of the Global South’s cities are generating new solidarities and ideas of what counts as a life worth living.
Protests in China are shining a light not only on the country’s draconian population management but restrictions on workers everywhere.