The myth of apolitical science
            <b>Freedom's Laboratory: The Cold War Struggle for the Soul of Science</b>
            <i>Audra J. Wolfe</i>
            Johns Hopkins University Press, 2018. 312 pp.

Wellerstein, Alex

doi:10.1126/science.aav4900

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…-the inability of science to consider myth as a whole by the forces of individual scientific disciplines and its disinterest in recognizing the cultural value of myth for man and humanity; -the fundamental untranslability of mythological codes into the language of science (Wellerstein, 2018) etc.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Myth In Digital Epoch: Preliminary Research Results

Stavitskiy¹

2021

European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Myth In Digital Epoch: Preliminary Research Results

Stavitskiy¹

2021

European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Researchers dissected the myth according to their disciplines, analyzing its manifestations in their individual responsibility area, and completely ignoring results obtained in adjacent scientific branches (Fernandes, 2020). As a result, the myth turned into the set of particular features (Wellerstein, 2018). Specialized researchers of the myth seem to talk about different things in different languages, without understanding each other at all (Rivera, 2018) since each of them studies the myth within the selected particular subject.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preconditions And Starting Attitudes Of The General Theory Of Myth

Stavitskiy¹

2021

European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article is devoted to the consideration of preconditions and initial attitudes of the general theory of myth created within non-classical mythology where the myth, in addition to tales about gods and heroes, is considered as the basic universal of culture creating areas of meanings. The myth is understood as an ontological property of conscience that develops abilities of a person. In the 20th century, science and society have grown to understand the myth in its modern interpretation. To adequately understand the myth, modern researchers of different specializations need to combine their efforts, in order to create the general theory of myth (GTM). The purpose of the article is to consider main preconditions for emergence of the GTM based on the universal (phenomenological or transcendental) approach to myth and myth-making. The authors analyze three main groups of preconditions for the creation of the general theory of myth: historical, theoretical and organizational. The first group is associated with the development of society which, while moving to the digital era, actualizes the interest in the myth. The second group relies on achievements of non-classical rationality which significantly facilitate the understanding of the myth and its social and cultural mission. The third group covers problems of organizing myth researchers into a network community integrated around specific conferences and journals. All together create the preconditions for systemic integration of myth ontology studies as a culture basic universal, which will allow creating the general theory of myth.

show abstract

“…The polarization and politicization of scientific evidence impedes implementation of effective land management plans, policies, and management by raising the volume of the disagreement; obscuring the line between facts, opinions, and legal requirements; creating the impression that Accepted Article knowledge is more uncertain than it is; and increasing the time to resolution. Wellerstein et al (2018) argue that the premise of science as apolitical is simply a myth -since all science takes place and is supported within a highly political environment. Nonetheless, when scientists affiliate themselves with one-sided or partisan views and activism, they inevitably minimize their value and that of the applied science (Pielke 2007, Lackey 2007.…”

Section: Advocacy and Objectivity -Is It One Or The Other?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Wildfire and climate change adaptation of western North American forests: a case for intentional management

Hessburg

Prichard

Hagmann

et al. 2021

Ecological Applications

145

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Forest landscapes across western North America (wNA) have experienced extensive changes over the last two centuries, while climatic warming has become a global reality over the last 4 decades. Resulting interactions between historical increases in forested area and density and recent rapid warming, increasing insect mortality, and wildfire burned areas, are now leading to substantial abrupt landscape alterations. These outcomes are forcing forest planners and managers to identify strategies that can modify future outcomes that are ecologically and/or socially undesirable. Past forest management, including widespread harvest of fire-and climate-tolerant large old trees and old forests, fire exclusion (both Indigenous and lightning ignitions), and highly effective wildfire suppression have contributed to the current state of wNA forests. These practices were successful at meeting short-term demands, but they match poorly to modern realities. Hagmann et al. (in press) review a century of observations and multi-scale, multi-proxy research evidence that details widespread changes in forested landscapes and wildfire regimes since the influx of European colonists. Over the preceding 10 millennia, large areas of wNA were already settled and proactively managed with intentional burning by Indigenous tribes. Prichard et al. (in press) then review the research on management practices historically applied by Indigenous tribes and currently applied by some managers to intentionally manage forests for resilient conditions. They address ten questions surrounding the application and relevance of these management practices. Here, we highlight the main findings of both papers and offer recommendations for management. We discuss progress paralysis that often occurs with strict adherence to the precautionary principle; offer insights for dealing with the common problem of irreducible uncertainty and suggestions for reframing management and policy direction; and identify key knowledge gaps and research needs.

show abstract

The myth of apolitical science Freedom's Laboratory: The Cold War Struggle for the Soul of Science Audra J. Wolfe Johns Hopkins University Press, 2018. 312 pp.

Abstract: Denouncing state-controlled research, U.S. investigators advanced the American agenda during the Cold War

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Myth In Digital Epoch: Preliminary Research Results

Myth In Digital Epoch: Preliminary Research Results

Preconditions And Starting Attitudes Of The General Theory Of Myth

Wildfire and climate change adaptation of western North American forests: a case for intentional management

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About