Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Factual and normative dissent in media debates about climate policy

  • Published:
Climatic Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This is a brief, modest comment on Schmidt and Schäfer’s discourse analysis of dominant normative views in the climate policy debate. I take their empirical findings as a starting point to reflect on the way democratic societies should handle normative and factual dissent in policy deliberation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Betz G (2013) In defence of the value free ideal. Eur J Philos Sci 3(2):207–220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Douglas HE (2009) Science, policy, and the value-free ideal. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, Pa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howson C, Urbach P (1989) Scientific reasoning: the Bayesian approach. Open Court, La Salle, Ill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hulme M (2009) Why we disagree about climate change: understanding controversy, inaction and opportunity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kitcher P (2010) The climate change debates. Science 328:1230–1234

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kyburg, Henry,. 1992. The scope of Bayesian reasoning. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial meeting of the philosophy of science association 1992:139–152.

  • Mitchell SD (2004) The prescribed and proscribed values in science policy. In: Wolters G, Machamer P (eds) Science, values, and objectivity. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, pp. 245–255

    Google Scholar 

  • Oreskes N, Conway EM (2010) Merchants of doubt. Bloomsbury Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker W (2014) Values and uncertainties in climate prediction, revisited. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 46:24–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rudner, Richard. 1953. The scientist qua scientist makes value judgements. Philos Sci 20 (1): 1–6.

  • Schneider SH (2001) What is’dangerous' climate change? Nature 411(6833):17–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schurz, Gerhard. 2013. Wertneutralität und hypothetische Werturteile in den Wissenschaften. In Werte in den Wissenschaften, ed. Martin Carrier and Gerhard Schurz, 305–334. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. KIT, Institute of Philosophy, Karlsruhe, Germany

    Gregor Betz

Authors
  1. Gregor Betz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gregor Betz.

Additional information

This article is part of a Special Issue on “Climate Justice in Interdisciplinary Research” edited by Christian Huggel, Markus Ohndorf, Dominic Roser, and Ivo Wallimann-Helmer.

This paper is linked to the following contribution of this special issue: Schmidt and Schaefer, doi 10.1007/s10584-015-1488-x

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Betz, G. Factual and normative dissent in media debates about climate policy. Climatic Change 133, 551–556 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-015-1489-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-015-1489-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation