Science Education in Post-Truth Age: Metaphysical Reflections from Bruno Latour’s Science Studies

Abstract

The term post truth was chosen as the word of the year by the Oxford dictionary in 2016. Today we see the proliferation of the term fake news as well as the dissemination of alternative views to science, such as “flat Earth”, integrative therapies, and anthropogenic global warming denial. Usually, postmodernism is blamed for subsidizing such movements theoretically. In the present article, we defend the thesis that both, the official discourse of science (modernist discourse) and its main criticisms (including postmodernism) seem to be propositions that sustain the contemporary scenarios of production and proliferation of post-truths. From Bruno Latour’s Science Studies, we reflect on the metaphysical basis of such perspectives and present an explanation to the formation of the “post-truth” through two different mechanisms, i.e, the presentation of a reduced vision of nature of science and the erasure of the network that sustains scientific propositions. We also defend that Science Education can adopt an alternative metaphysical basis, developed by Latour and collaborators in dialogue with different philosophical and sociological currents, contributing to the formation of citizens able to have a critical position in the contemporary socioscientific scenario.

Not Only Why but Also How to Trust Science: Reshaping Science Education Based on Science Studies for a Better Post-pandemic World

“…On the other hand, as Lima et al ( 2019 ) points out, it was also in the twentieth century that the public image of science, as well as the epistemological and social ideals that it inspired, were placed under suspicion. In particular, studies on the environmental impacts of modernist progress (Carson, 1994 ), as well as the evident danger of geopolitical conflicts revealed that science could not be considered a neutral or harmless practice.…”

“…Latour understands that post-truth is a situation in which two networks compete for the attention of the public sphere as if they were equivalent, but the fact is that one network is much wider and stable than the other. According to Lima et al ( 2019 ), one of the problems we are confronted with is that scientific facts are presented to society (in educational contexts also) as black boxes (Latour, 1988 ). So, whenever a community wants to defy a scientific explanation, it also presents a new black box.…”

“…Only networks wider and more stable than that should be accepted to defy the scientific claim . In this sense, science education must be concerned in opening “scientific black boxes,” showing science in action (Lima et al, 2019 ).…”