Doubt and denial: epistemic responsibility meets climate change scepticism
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The analysis in this essay is indebted to the analysis of climate change scepticism developed in Naomi Oreskes’s and Eric Conway’s Merchants of Doubt where they expose the vested interests that produce a degree of doubt with respect to climate change science. The argument addresses the appeal to an inflated conception of human freedom – Liberty – that is allegedly threatened by injunctions to control pollution in the interests of ecologically conscious behaviour across a range of human practices of consumption. The essay draws on and advocates rethinking issues about epistemic responsibility and testimonial injustice in working toward developing ecologically informed climate change advocacy. El análisis de este ensayo está influenciado por el análisis sobre escepticismo ante el cambio climático desarrollado por Naomi Oreskes y Eric Conway en Merchants of Doubt, donde exponen los intereses creados, que producen un grado de duda en relación a la ciencia del cambio climático. El argumento se refiere a la apelación a una concepción exagerada de la libertad humana - la Libertad - , presuntamente amenazada por medidas cautelares para controlar la contaminación en los intereses de la conducta ecológicamente consciente a través de toda una gama de prácticas humanas de consumo. El ensayo se basa en, y aboga por repensar las cuestiones acerca de la responsabilidad epistémica y defiende replantear las cuestiones acerca de la responsabilidad epistémica e injusticia testimonial en el trabajo hacia el desarrollo ecológicamente informado de la defensa del cambio climático. DOWNLOAD THIS PAPER FROM SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2247830
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it