Abstract
Many people, such as Adam Smith, Milton Friedman, Irving Fisher, and William Sharpe, assume that free markets full of rational people automatically lead to ethical actions and outcomes. After all, at its equilibrium point, a perfectly competitive free market maximizes utility, respects autonomy, and fulfills justice’s dictates. Unfortunately, in some technology markets, there are a significant number of people who have undergone epistemic closure. Epistemic closure entails that all reliable evidence that would challenge deeply held beliefs is dismissed as corrupted, whereas all supporting evidence, no matter how unreliable, is accepted as incontrovertible. Those who have the condition act irrationally within that domain. As a result, business decisions become much more difficult than they would be in a rational market. In this article, epistemic closure’s ethical issues are developed. First, although they are acting irrationally within the closure’s domain, those with epistemic closure can still be held accountable for their actions. Second, to deal ethically with epistemic closure and its consequences, then it is vital to know what it is and its root causes, as well as to have a practical principle that can assist in making pragmatic decisions. Because some new technologies face epistemic closure, then focusing on a particular representative case of it will help to illustrate the issue’s ethical dimensions.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
See Genus (2006), Guston and Sarewitz 2002, Mohr (1999), and Porter (1995) for various versions of how technology assessment should be implemented. Common to each method is the requirement that everyone involved be able to acknowledge that the others in the process are rational beings with rational viewpoints, although there is need to agree with that viewpoint.
I am not claiming that all technology is extrinsically good. Obviously, there are times when certain technology poses too great a risk or for some other moral reason to be permitted into a market. In this article, I will limit myself to technology that is not clearly defective.
There are a number of well-known instances of this sort of irrational market Ludditism. One is the anti-vaccine push for children, which was based on a seriously flawed—both morally and scientifically—now discredited study that was supposed to prove causal link between vaccinations at an early age and the development of autism (Goodlee et al. 2011, p. c7452). A number of parents refused to immunize their children because the former feared that their children would be injured more severely by the vaccine than by catching any of the illnesses prevented by the vaccine. A consequence was the loss of herd immunity in certain areas of the developed world when too few children in the area received vaccinations (Ibid.). Another case is the denial of human contribution to global warming.
However, the mere fact a person is irrational in one area of his or her overall beliefs and behavior does not entail that he or she is overall irrational. We will return to this point later on when moral responsibility for epistemic closure is discussed later in this section.
Of course, if the person is irrational overall, then his or her actions are neither morally right nor wrong because they are not actions in the first place. Voluntariness is a necessary condition for an event to be an action.
William Pentland describes a very similar case for an island in Maine. Many of the same charges and vitriolic actions can be seen in his article and the comments that follow it (see Pentland’s “Wind Power’s Worst Enemy: Noise,” 2011).
There were many more letters and APOVs on the wind turbine issue, but I wanted to focus on one town.
For the latter two sources, there are a number of comments left on the Web-pages on which The Daily News posts the letters and APOVs these comments were not assessed in full, because the posters were, in general, not identified. Because names are attached to the letters and APOV, I take it that they provide better evidence that the writer is committed fully to his or her position.
The same might was done for the pro-wind turbine side. Of the 19, only two use ad hominem attacks and information taken out of context. None of the other criteria were found.
For full disclosure, when I have interacted with CSOO members online, I have been accused of being on the wind turbine company’s payroll or having contracts with them. The fact is that neither is true nor do I have anything to gain from the technology other than what anyone would gain.
The Daily News has a very liberal policy on publishing Letters-to-the-Editor and APOVs. As long as they meet word limits, and do not engage into extreme of language, then they are printed. Because The News is a small newspaper with a small staff, it cannot check the veracity of the claims made.
Christopher Hanning and Amanda Harry state that their research supports that of Pierpont. The fact that the neutral panels did not find any of the three people’s work strong enough to change the panels’ view of health safety is a significant indication of the former’s research worth. Nor is their work listed in PubMed.
Because this review just came out, I do not expect anti-wind turbine folks to have heard of it. It is included merely to show further support for the conclusions drawn by the other researchers and agencies.
See Freeman’s Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach (1984).
Of course, if the mine owners or government has the ability to mitigate the injury, perhaps by moving the community to at least as good homes, then that might be morally required.
I leave it an open question as to the threshold required for a market to become too risky for wise investment. Adequate parameters would have to evaluate whether trust can reasonably be maintained to such a degree that buyers and sellers would be willing to risk their resources.
Of course, even an irrational belief can be tolerated at times, according to PMP. If it endangers only the person making such an epistemic mistake, or those who agree with him or her, then respect for their autonomy as persons making decisions in their lives would allow it to occur. The right to decide is not limited to the right to decide rightly. Even bad mistakes can be valuable to markets so that the people making them and others learn from what did not work. However, if the decision affects those who do not deserve the consequences caused by what we will state is a market defect, then it is unethical for epistemic closure to influence market actions.
One significant reason that certain people oppose a particular technology is because it threatens something that they consider to be essential or central to whom they are as people.
References
Appiah, K. T. (1994). Racisms. In L. May & S. C. Sharratt (Eds.), Applied ethics (pp. 333–344). Englewood Hills, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Australia’s National Health & Medical Research Council (ANH&MRC). (2010). Wind turbines and health. http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/_files_nhmrc/file/publications/synopses/public_statement_wind_turbines_and_health.pdf. Accessed 19 May 2011.
Clear Skies Over Orangeville v. Town Board of the Town of Orangeville, and Susan May, Hans Boxler, Jr., James Herman, Andrew Flint, and Tom Schabloski in the capacities as Town Board Members and Stony Creek Farm LLC. State of New York Supreme Court, Buffalo, NY, 27 April 2010.
Colby, W. D., Dobie, R., Leventhall, G., Lipscomb, D. M., McCunney, R. J., Seilo, M. T., & Søndergaard, B. (2009). Wind turbine sound and health effects: An expert panel review. Prepared for: American Wind Energy Association and Canadian Wind Energy Association.
Cooley, D. (2004). Transgenic organisms and the failure of a free market argument. Business Ethics: A European Review, 13(4), 354–371.
Cooley, D. (2009). Technology, transgenics, and a practical moral code. The International Library of Ethics, Law and Technology series, Vol. 4. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Dawson, E., Gilovich, T., & Reagan, D. T. (2002). Motivated reasoning and performance on the Wason selection task. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(10), 1379–1387.
Fine, C. (2006). Is the emotional dog wagging its rational tail, or chasing it? Philosophical Explorations, 9(1), 83–98.
Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Marshfield, MA: Pitman.
Genus, A. (2006). Rethinking constructive technology assessment as democratic, reflective discourse. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 73, 13–26.
Godlee, F., Smith, J., & Marcovitch, H. (2011). Wakefield’s article linking MMR vaccine and autism was fraudulent. BMJ, 342, c7452.
Gorovitz, S. (1988). Informed consent and patient autonomy. In J. C. Callahan (Ed.), Ethical issues in professional life (pp. 182–188). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Graczyk, M. (2011). BLOG: A mighty angry wind. The Daily News. http://thedailynewsonline.com/article_0b3eee98-2c8a-11e0-9263-001cc4c03286.html. Accessed 18 May 2011
Guston, D. H., & Sarewitz, D. (2002). Real-time technology assessment. Technology in Society, 24(1), 93–109.
Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dot and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review, 108, 814–834.
Heintzelman, M. D., & Tuttle, C. (2011). Values in the wind: a hedonic analysis of wind power facilities. Land Economics (forthcoming). http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1803601. Accessed 18 Oct 2011.
Hoen, B., Wiser, R., Cappers, P., Thayer, M., & Sethi, G. (2009). The impact of wind power projects on residential property values in the United States: A multi-site hedonic analysis. Technical report LBNL-2829FE. Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Environmental Energy Technologies Division. http://eetd.lbl.gov/ea/ems/reports/lbnl-2829e.pdf. Accessed 20 September 2011.
Invenergy. (2010). Draft environmental impact statement for the stony creek wind farm (pp. 1–233). http://www.invenergyllc.com/stonycreek/pdf/1/03_DEIS/DEIS_Text/SC_DEIS_2010_02_18_Accepted.pdf. 18 February 2010.
Kant, I. (1964). Groundwork of the metaphysic of morals (H.J. Paton, Trans. & Ed.). New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Knopper, L. D., & Olson, C. A. (2011). Health effects and wind turbines. Environmental Health, 10(1), 78.
Kunda, Z. (1990). The case of motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 180(3), 480–498.
Leventhall, G. (2006). Infrasound from wind turbines—fact, fiction or deception. Canadian Acoustics, 34(2), 29–36.
Lincoln Township, WI. (2000). Final report of the Wind Turbine Moratorium Study Committee. http://docs.wind-watch.org/lincoln_township-full_moratorium_report.pdf. Accessed 20 September 2011.
Martin, C. L. (2010). Your guide to wind turbine syndrome. http://www.windturbinesyndrome.com/news/2010/your-guide-to-wind-turbine-syndrome/. Accessed 19 May 2011.
Minnesota Department of Health, Environmental Health Division. (2009). Public health impacts of wind turbines (pp. 1–32). In response to a request from: Minnesota Department of Commerce, Office of Energy Security.
Mohr, H. (1999). Technology assessment in theory and practice. Techné: Journal of the Society for Philosophy and Technology, 4(4), 22–25.
National Academies of Science, United States. (2007). Environmental impacts of wind-energy projects. Committee on Environmental Impacts of Wind Energy Projects, National Research Council. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
National Health Service (NHS) Knowledge Service, United Kingdom. (2009). Are wind farms a health risk? http://www.nhs.uk/news/2009/08August/Pages/Arewindfarmsahealthrisk.aspx. Accessed 19 May 2011.
Ontario Chief Medical Officer of Health (OCMOH). (2010). The potential health impact of wind turbines. Catalogue No. 014894. Ontario: Queen’s Printer for Ontario.
Pederson, E., & Waye, K. P. (2007a). Perception and annoyance due to wind turbine noise—a dose-response relationship. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 116(6), 3460–3470.
Pederson, E., & Waye, K. P. (2007b). Wind turbine noise, annoyance and self-reported health and well-being in different living environments. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 64(7), 480–486.
Pentland, W. (2011). Wind power’s worst enemy: Noise. Forbes. http://blogs.forbes.com/williampentland/2011/04/24/wind-powers-worst-enemy-noise/. Accessed 9 May 2011.
Pew Research Center. (2011). Political topology: Beyond red vs. blue. http://people-press.org/files/legacy-pdf/Beyond-Red-vs-Blue-The-Political-Typology.pdf. Accessed 12 May 2011.
Pierpont, N. (2009). Wind turbine syndrome. Santa Fe, NM: K-Selected Books.
Porter, A. (1995). Technology assessment. Impact Assessment, 13, 135–151.
Public Conversations Project. (1999). An overview of PCP’s work on abortion. http://www.publicconversations.org/node/67. Accessed 25 September 2011.
Redlawsk, D. P. (2002). Hot cognition or cool consideration? Testing the effects of motivated reasoning on political decision making. The Journal of Politics, 64(4), 1021–1044.
Sanchez, J. (2010). Frum, cocktail parties, and the threat of doubt. http://www.juliansanchez.com/2010/03/26/frum-cocktail-parties-and-the-threat-of-doubt/. Accessed 20 September 2011.
Sims, S., & Dent, P. (2007). Property stigma: Wind Farms are just the latest fashion. Journal of Property Investment and Finance, 25(6), 626–651.
Sims, S., Dent, P., & Oskrochi, G. R. (2008). Modelling the impact of wind farms on house prices in the UK. International Journal of Strategic Property Management, 12, 251–269.
Sterzinger, G., Beck, F., & Kostiuk, D. (2003). The effect of wind development on local property values. Analytical report, Renewable Energy Project, May 2003. http://www.repp.org/articles/static/1/binaries/wind_online_final.pdf. Accessed 20 September 2011.
Sunstein, C. (2002). Risk and reason. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Sunstein, C. (2005). Laws of fear. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Surtel, M. (2011a). Orangeville: Clear skies appeals to state’s highest court. The Daily News. http://thedailynewsonline.com/news/article_e118db08-aea5-11e0-81b1-001cc4c002e0.html. Accessed 19 September 2011.
Surtel, M. (2011b). Study hints at cost of wind development. The Daily News. http://thedailynewsonline.com/news/article_1db29070-bd80-11e0-a2df-001cc4c03286.html. Accessed 26 September 2011.
Takezawa, M., Gummerum, M., & Keller, M. (2006). A stage for the rational tail of the emotional dog: Roles of moral reasoning in group decision making. Journal of Economic Psychology, 27, 117–139.
The Daily News (TDN) Letters. Various authors. Accessed 26 September 2011.
The Daily News (TDN) Letter 1. (2009). http://thedailynewsonline.com/blogs/commentary_and_letters/article_28e0fb17-f673-5c29-a2ca-c9e3f342c325.html.
The Daily News (TDN) Letter 2. (2009). http://thedailynewsonline.com/blogs/commentary_and_letters/article_f3656db2-56ed-58ec-908a-68bee853a8fe.html.
The Daily News (TDN) Letter 3. (2010). http://thedailynewsonline.com/blogs/commentary_and_letters/article_5ecf2f91-5322-59cf-929e-96c857639af6.html.
The Daily News (TDN) Letter 4. (2011). http://thedailynewsonline.com/opinion/editorials/article_eaaea816-d527-11e0-a4f7-001cc4c002e0.html.
The Daily News (TDN) Letter 5. (2008). http://thedailynewsonline.com/blogs/commentary_and_letters/article_22814cb0-804c-5228-8de3-aa48f9185267.html.
The Daily News (TDN) Letter 6. (2011). http://thedailynewsonline.com/opinion/editorials/article_4ff07632-da37-11e0-9827-001cc4c03286.html.
The Daily News (TDN) Letter 7. (2011). http://thedailynewsonline.com/opinion/editorials/article_2c0a85f8-91f0-11e0-8891-001cc4c03286.html.
The Daily News (TDN) Letter 8. (2009). http://thedailynewsonline.com/blogs/commentary_and_letters/article_a34652ed-97e8-5c4a-b4d3-b4feeaf74618.html.
The Daily News (TDN) Letter 9. (2010). http://thedailynewsonline.com/opinion/editorials/article_27a1f174-f35b-11df-b397-001cc4c002e0.html.
The Daily News (TDN) Letter 10. (2011). http://thedailynewsonline.com/opinion/editorials/article_78d11fce-66b1-11e0-987a-001cc4c002e0.html.
The Daily News (TDN) Letter 11. (2011). http://thedailynewsonline.com/opinion/editorials/article_4aab2af8-9961-11e0-a093-001cc4c002e0.html.
The Daily News (TDN) Letter 12. (2009). http://thedailynewsonline.com/blogs/commentary_and_letters/article_d08d2422-4e89-531d-bbe7-41f595a62fc7.html.
The Daily News (TDN) Letter 13. (2009). http://thedailynewsonline.com/blogs/commentary_and_letters/article_b87fa9a4-f51e-53cb-b3aa-8e856d1424d7.html.
The Daily News (TDN) Letter 14. (2009). http://thedailynewsonline.com/blogs/commentary_and_letters/article_c1dcdfc6-7c4e-50b6-affd-b7174a1608be.html.
The Daily News (TDN) Letter 15. (2011). http://thedailynewsonline.com/opinion/editorials/article_f3761d7e-44f6-11e0-ae64-001cc4c03286.html.
The Daily News (TDN) Letter 16. (2011). http://thedailynewsonline.com/opinion/editorials/article_be7dfee0-8cde-11e0-9a6f-001cc4c03286.html.
The Daily News (TDN) Letter 17. (2011). http://thedailynewsonline.com/opinion/editorials/article_52f8aebe-d38c-11e0-9aeb-001cc4c03286.html.
The Daily News (TDN) Letter 18. (2011). http://thedailynewsonline.com/opinion/editorials/article_4aca28ac-54a3-11e0-950b-001cc4c03286.html.
The Daily News (TDN) Letter 19. (2009). http://thedailynewsonline.com/blogs/commentary_and_letters/article_e72fffe4-7872-5fb3-8c63-b9775177b719.html.
United States Department of Agriculture. (2009). 2007 Census of agriculture: Summary and state data Vol. 1 Geographic area series, Part 5. http://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2007/Full_Report/usv1.pdf. Accessed 19 September 2011.
United States Department of Energy (DOE). (2010). Wind power today 2010. Prepared by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). http://www1.eere.energy.gov/windandhydro/pdfs/47531.pdf. Accessed 20 September 2011.
United States Department of Energy (DOE). (2011). Wind energy benefits. http://www1.eere.energy.gov/windandhydro/pdfs/49053.pdf. Accessed 20 September 2011.
van den Berg, F., Pedersen, E., Bouma, J., Bakker, R. (2008). GroningenProject WINDFARMperception: Visual and acoustic impact of wind turbine farms on residents. FP6-2005-Science-and-Society-20, Specific Support Action, Project no. 044628.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Cooley, D.R. Epistemic Closure’s Clash with Technology in New Markets. J Bus Ethics 108, 181–199 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-1069-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-1069-5