One thing to make very clear first: Audra is an honest-to-god historian of science. She has the relevant PhD, has published peer-reviewed books and articles, presents at conferences, and is well-known and respected within the field. And a friend of mine.
Which is why I say that most of these things are not "really" postmodern in the way people tend to read them. There are perfectly respectable epistemic positions that do not require science to be "pure" to be useful and "true" in a qualified sense ("it fits our evidence so far").
-
-
As for whether this approach is more actionable — I actually believe it is, and I say this as someone who is something of a science communicator and is, indeed, trying to engage in real world issues. But that's a longer Tweet-storm than I suspect anyone wants to read.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.