{"id":2985,"date":"2024-07-01T09:45:23","date_gmt":"2024-07-01T07:45:23","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/?post_type=dialogue&#038;p=2985"},"modified":"2024-07-01T15:06:08","modified_gmt":"2024-07-01T13:06:08","slug":"on-the-role-of-science-in-times-of-crisis","status":"publish","type":"dialogue","link":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/on-the-role-of-science-in-times-of-crisis\/","title":{"rendered":"On the role of science in times of crisis, bullshitting and the ideal features section"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<div class=\"wp-block-group has-cyan-bluish-gray-background-color has-background is-layout-constrained wp-block-group-is-layout-constrained\">\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">About Uwe Justus Wenzel<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>The philosopher Uwe Justus Wenzel was the features editor of the \u201cNeue Z\u00fcrcher Zeitung\u201d from 1995 to 2017. He was also a lecturer in the field of philosophy and the history of knowledge at ETH Zurich. Wenzel was a member of the board of the Swiss Academy of Humanities and Social Sciences (SAGW) from 2010 to 2018.&nbsp;From 2018 to 2023 he worked as a senior scientist at ETH Zurich in a research project on \u201cScience and Philosophy between Academia and the Public Sphere\u201d. Uwe Justus Wenzel lives in Basel and Valais. His most recent publications are:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Von Adorno bis Wittgenstein. Philosophische Profile.&nbsp;Schwabe, Basel 2018<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Das Wagnis der Torheit. Christliche Antworten \u2013 philosophische Fragen.&nbsp;TVZ \/ Theologischer Verlag Z\u00fcrich, Zurich 2018<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Zeit \u2013 in Gedanken erfasst. Philosophische Glossen.&nbsp;Schwabe, Basel 2020<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-group is-style-reduced-width is-layout-constrained wp-block-group-is-layout-constrained\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-group is-layout-constrained wp-block-group-is-layout-constrained\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-group is-layout-constrained wp-block-group-is-layout-constrained\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-group is-layout-constrained wp-block-group-is-layout-constrained\">\n<p class=\"is-style-lead\"><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"is-style-lead\">As part of an ETH project, you looked at the relationship between science and the public. What was it about exactly?<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The project covered many thematic facets. I will briefly outline one that might be relevant to our discussion: scientific knowledge is not rarely but rather typically provisional knowledge, it is subject to correction. For this reason, it cannot always satisfy the need for certainty and clarity that arises among the public, and also among government decision-makers, as soon as political controversies are linked to questions of knowledge. The coronavirus pandemic showed this, but it was not alone in doing so.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"is-style-lead\">Particularly in times of crisis, we see scientists come out to explain things in public. What role do they play at such moments?<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>I\u2019d say they do not play one single role when they appear in public. There are \u2013 at least \u2013 two roles: on the one hand, that of the expert who is consulted and explains, for example, the current state of knowledge in scientific research into a virus, and on the other, the role of the intellectual contemporary who \u2013 as \u201cnon-experts\u201d also do \u2013 speaks out on issues of \u201cpublic interest\u201d and, for example, comments on certain political measures to combat the pandemic. Under certain circumstances, this can lead to a kind of role diffusion, and this is something that I do not find unproblematic.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\">\n<p>\u201cAnyone who gives political advice as a scientific expert, even if implicitly, can be exploited, whether as a prophet or as a scapegoat.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"is-style-lead\">How is that problematic?<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The problematic aspect comes into focus as soon as we ask about the relationship between science and politics \u2013 here the key term is \u201cpolitical consultancy\u201d. Put simply and fundamentally: as far as political questions have to do with problems of knowledge, there is nothing to be said against, but everything to be said in favour of also drawing on scientific knowledge when answering them. But it depends on the \u201cas far as\u201d \u2013 and on what \u201cdrawing on\u201d means. Answers to the question of what we know and what we <em>can<\/em> know are not, as such, answers to the question that is always disputed in the political sphere, namely: how do we want to live and live together? Scientific findings, especially if they are only preliminary findings, cannot be translated \u201cone-to-one\u201d &#8211; smoothly and logically \u2013 into political decisions. Since, <em>nolens volens<\/em>, political representatives of a community have room for manoeuvre even in situations in which no sensible decisions can be made without scientific expertise, they should use it responsibly.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>This also means that they should not want to shift the political responsibility for decisions onto the scientific community. Conversely, if scientists are asked for \u201cadvice\u201d and also appear in public, they should be prepared to find themselves in the grey area of role dialectics: anyone who gives political advice as a scientific expert, even if implicitly, can be exploited, whether as a prophet or as a scapegoat.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"is-style-lead\">But isn\u2019t it the responsibility of scientists, who are consulted as experts, to point out possible political courses of action?<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Yes, scientific experts should also point out possible courses of action \u2013 at least in cases where science and politics are intertwined, as in the climate debate. Ideally, however, they will point out <em>various <\/em>possible courses of action in the form of hypothetical scenarios: what happens with what probability if we do this or that, what happens if we don\u2019t do this or that?<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>And, in such cases, it is of course sensible to make political decisions on the basis of scientific findings. But such decisions must be <em>legitimised<\/em> in the political discourse and go through the established political decision-making processes \u2013 in political committee disputes and in the political public sphere. This also means: political decisions cannot obtain their democratic legitimacy by recourse to science, not \u2013 or at least: not only and certainly not \u201cin the final analysis\u201d \u2013 by referring to the fact that science has established this or that. If politicians try to do this anyway, they are contributing to the erosion of our society\u2019s democratic institutions. As are scientists who offer them a helping hand.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"is-style-lead\">To a certain extent, both science and politics were under the weight of expectation during the pandemic. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The weight of expectation increased because people\u2019s need for orientation grew. This, among other things, characterises crisis situations. But I\u2019d say the need for orientation can be articulated in very different ways. It can manifest itself in the desire for certainty, but also in the willingness to doubt everything.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"is-style-lead\">Questioning assumptions is actually very scientific. But that\u2019s not what you mean. Or is it?<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Methodological doubt is institutionalised as a procedure in science. But this has no direct counterpart in the public sphere. As a rule, doubt in this sphere is not methodologically disciplined, but is linked to all kinds of political or ideological ideas and beliefs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"is-style-lead\">Can we say that science has contributed to the division of society? <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>During the coronavirus crisis, new, preliminary scientific knowledge was continuously generated \u2013 and this was done to an extent hardly known before. In some cases, supposed findings were also published without having gone through the usual scientific peer review process. Study results were presented in a preliminary form in a way that had never been seen before \u2013 and were called into question again by the results of other studies. The scope for interpretation was wide, evidently also for \u201cscientific laypeople\u201d. It is therefore not surprising that the level of acceptance of scientific statements, and of the measures based on such statements, was low among some of the population.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"is-style-lead\">So this visible appearance of scientists in a political process has contributed to the hardening of fronts?<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In a way, yes. There are now sociological studies that describe this. One of them is by Alexander Bogner. In his book \u201cDie Epistemisierung des Politischen. Wie die Macht des Wissens die Demokratie gef\u00e4hrdet\u201d (The Epistemisation of Politics \u2013 How the Power of Knowledge Endangers Democracy), he speaks of an \u201cuprising against the rationalistic world view\u201d of science. This uprising was rehearsed during the coronavirus crisis, but is also underway in terms of climate research. The diagnostician of the times sees a \u201ccounter-rationalist grassroots movement\u201d at work that not only lives from the need for orientation or simple explanation, but also from an impulse for freedom that expresses itself in a kind of wild self-assertion:&nbsp; self-assertion against the colonisation of the living environment by \u201cknow-it-all science\u201d. And, at the same time, against policy makers that sometimes refer to scientific findings in order to emphasise the supposed lack of alternatives to what they enact as political measures in the crisis situation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Perhaps we could also speak of defiance in revolt. Without such a component, I can hardly explain how \u201csceptics\u201d can simply close their eyes and present \u201calternative facts\u201d in the case of the climate crisis, for example, when the evidence is overwhelming.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"is-style-lead\">And there is no longer any dialogue between the two sides. The discourse is suspended, which is one of the foundations of enlightenment and a prerequisite for liberal forms of society. So just how dramatic is the situation? <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The situation may be dramatic, but hopefully it is not tragic in the sense of a tragedy that ends in a necessary and deadly failure. The modern democratic, liberal constitutional state, if you look at it as a stage, acts out all kinds of things: dramas, tragedies, comedies, farces, burlesques, sometimes even operas, even comic ones. What I\u2019m trying to say is: the democratic, liberal constitutional state has the task of ensuring that its citizens can form their own opinions and enabling a \u201cclash of opinions\u201d. This is not quite the same as organising a discussion in a university seminar where only reasonable \u2013 comprehensible \u2013 arguments count. Only in the ideal case does the dispute take place in the form of dialogues or discourses that are open and unbiased and, at the same time, are supported by a willingness on all sides to reach compromises across ideological camps.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Anyway, this happens more often in a partly direct democratic political system like in Switzerland than elsewhere. But here, too, the following applies: a liberal, constitutional democracy cannot and should not prescribe or dictate \u201ctruths\u201d; not just ideological truths, but also scientific truths. Anyone and everyone can believe and publicly assert what he or she wants to believe and assert. As far as assertion \u2013 the public expression of an opinion \u2013 is concerned, the limits are set by criminal law if necessary.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"is-style-lead\">Assertions are often not substantiated, they are simply repeated. And it\u2019s not just conspiracy theorists who behave in this way, it\u2019s also an American presidential candidate, for example. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Yes, that is the case (although being a presidential candidate and spreading conspiracy theories can certainly apply to one and the same person). It has a fatal tone because it happens not only in authoritarian, dictatorial or semi-democratic societies, but also in democratic societies whose legal system is based on the principle of free self-determination of the individual and that of the collective (which decides by a majority). You can expose people who are talking nonsense. But you can\u2019t prevent them from doing so \u2013 or at least you can\u2019t if you don\u2019t want to interfere with fundamental rights.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\">\n<p>\u201cThose who habitually produce humbug systematically distort their perception of reality to a certain extent.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"is-style-lead\">Even if the statements are obviously false?<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>It is not forbidden to say something that is not true (unless you are testifying under oath in court). Nobody who believes the Earth is a disc has to go to prison for it. The question, however, is whether the statements we are focussing on here are untruths and lies. The American philosopher Harry G. Frankfurt spoke of \u201cbullshit\u201d in connection with such phenomena back in 1986, in other words rubbish, nonsense or humbug. In order to understand the phenomenon of bullshit, its relationship to lies must be contemplated. Anyone who lies must know the truth \u2013 or at least believe they know it. Anyone who talks bullshit doesn\u2019t have to. The \u201cbullshitter\u201d \u2013 and Frankfurt considers this to be essential \u2013 is indifferent to the truth; he does not take it or the facts seriously. He is primarily interested in getting away with his claims. He cheats his way through with half-truths or untruths; when it suits him, even with truths. He blathers, spouts hot air and bends everything to suit his needs.&nbsp; Those who habitually produce humbug systematically distort their perception of reality to a certain extent. One point of Frankfurt\u2019s reflections: bullshit is \u201ca greater enemy of the truth than lies\u201d. This is because the liar must maintain an alert relationship with the truth in order to conceal his lie, the truth \u2013 the facts \u2013 retain their value. The liar and the person committed to the truth, writes Frankfurt, \u201cparticipate in the same game, as it were, albeit on different sides\u201d. This is not the case with the bullshitter. He neither accepts the \u201cauthority of truth\u201d, nor does he explicitly reject it \u2013 he simply ignores it. His unfounded drivel undermines our culture, which relies on the distinction between true and false \u2013 and, I would add, on the concept of fact, which logically excludes the existence of \u201calternative facts\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"is-style-lead\">If nothing else, digital and social media make it easy to spread bullshit. What if the bullshitter remains unchallenged?<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Just two years ago, J\u00fcrgen Habermas published a small update of his \u201cThe Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere\u201d. In it, he speaks of fragmented public subgroups with a view to the socio-electronic sphere: there is an affective polarisation taking place that prevents dialogue and a fact-based exchange of opinions. Opinions are formed and judgements are made on the basis of group affiliation, not on the basis of factual considerations and reasonable arguments. We are all familiar with the talk of \u201cecho chambers\u201d and \u201cbubbles\u201d. But Switzerland is also better off in this respect than some other countries. According to a recently published study by the University of Basel based on a Swiss Broadcasting Corporation (SRG) survey, the affective polarisation, the ideological divide, does not appear to have increased in recent years. The reasons for this can be found in the numerous direct democratic votes on factual issues that are discussed in public and which repeatedly result in \u201cvoting coalitions\u201d across different camps.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"is-style-lead\">So you haven\u2019t given up hope? <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>We shouldn\u2019t throw the baby out with the bathwater when criticising the current situation. As long as the democratic and direct democratic institutions and also the scientific institutions and the education system still function to some extent, I see no reason to write off the project of enlightenment and self-enlightenment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"is-style-lead\">In order to conduct a dialogue, we need a forum, a medium that does not contribute to affective polarisation.&nbsp; You were the NZZ features editor for over 20 years and once described the features section as a medium for public discourse. Is that still the case today?<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>It was, in a way, an ideal type that I had in mind during my many years as an editor responsible for the humanities, reviews of non-fiction and diagnosis of the times in the features section \u2013 an ideal that goes back to the Age of Enlightenment, to the idea of a self-enlightened public, as described by Immanuel Kant: the public is \u201ceducated\u201d, not necessarily \u201cscholarly\u201d, it reads (magazines, newspapers, books), discusses what it has read and, if necessary, also writes itself. This was once called the \u201ceducated middle class\u201d; I would lower the requirement profile a little and say: an amendable smattering of knowledge was and is sufficient to be able to belong to the features section readership. This, in turn, means that regularly opening a good features section contributes to adult education.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\">\n<p><strong><em>&nbsp;<\/em>\u201cMaking judgements does not mean taking predetermined positions or opinions.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"is-style-lead\">What is special about the features section?<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>For me, the particularity of the features section as a department, as well as the type of text that the term denotes, lies in what I would like to call \u201cformation of taste\u201d. I mean formation of taste in a broad sense that doesn\u2019t only refer to theatre, music, literature and art. We could also say that the features section serves to cultivate reasoning or the power of judgement \u2013 the reflective power of judgement in Kant\u2019s sense, which does <em>not<\/em> subsume the \u201cparticular\u201d under a predetermined \u201cgeneral\u201d (a principle, a law), but rather searches for points of view and standards of judgement first and always once more. Such sharpening of the power of judgement goes hand in hand in places \u2013 only seemingly paradoxically \u2013 with sceptical abstention from judgement. Making judgements does not mean taking predetermined positions or opinions. The features section leaves that sort of thing to other, more \u201copinionated\u201d departments.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"is-style-lead\">But what would it mean to judge and make judgements?<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>To make judgements means first of all to differentiate, to facet, to distinguish \u2013 and in the literal sense that means: to criticise. The features section is the \u201corgan\u201d of a critique that turns against schematic thinking in supposedly exhaustive alternatives \u2013 black or white, no or yes \u2013 not only in the aesthetic sphere, but also in the ethical, moral, political and social spheres &#8230; The motto of the features section is therefore: \u201ctertium datur\u201d, there is a third \u2013 at least; better still: a third, fourth, fifth perspective in which a social phenomenon, a moral problem, a play, a book can be perceived. The features section cultivates a sense of possibility. In addition to curiosity, this requires a certain impartiality. Ideological blinkers of any kind are an obstacle. In this sense, I think we tried to contribute to the formation of taste and judgement in my time in the NZZ features section.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"is-style-lead\">What can your discipline, philosophy, contribute to promoting a diversity of perspectives?<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Philosophical motifs are clearly woven into the implied typical ideal concept of the features section: clearing up prejudices, clarifying concepts, making rigid forms of thought more fluid, questioning opinions that seem self-evident, reflection and criticism, sharpening judgement \u2013 all this has been part of the core business of philosophy since its European beginnings in Greece. And its beginnings also include the practice of a wide range of knowledge. In the form of Socrates, philosophy went back and forth between the marketplace and the academy, between the sphere of exchanging opinions and that of the pioneering search for truth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The question is whether, now that it is well established as a university discipline, it can maintain the knowledge-promoting <em>tension<\/em> that results from such a <em>range of knowledge<\/em>. It cannot do this if it ignores what is happening in the meeting place and marketplace (Greek: agora, Latin: forum), if it forgets that it \u2013 at least also \u2013 has to grasp its own time in thought, as Hegel characterised the task. However, it is just as unable to maintain the tension when it does what Hegel criticised the popular philosophy of his time for doing: it speaks \u201cto our ordinary consciousness, applying it as the ultimate standard\u201d. <em>Not<\/em> to take ordinary consciousness as the ultimate standard means, if you like, giving honour to the truth. Of course, this does not mean, however, that it is unphilosophical to take up everyday consciousness, to enter into dialogue with it in order to begin a philosophical search movement that is guided by an interest in truth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"is-style-lead\">Does this also represent an educational task?<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>I can hardly imagine a more important educational task: exchanging opinions, views, assertions, prejudices, judgements and questions together and mutually practising the art of criticism, the art of differentiating judgement. That would be adult education for the advanced \u2013 or better: for the advancing.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The philosopher and feature writer Uwe Justus Wenzel deals with the relationship between science and the public. According to Wenzel, it is problematic when political decisions are shifted onto science<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":26,"featured_media":2979,"template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":""},"dialogue-category":[],"dialogue-tag":[135],"class_list":["post-2985","dialogue","type-dialogue","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","dialogue-tag-uwe-justus-wenzel"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>On the role of science in times of crisis, bullshitting and the ideal features section - TRANSIT<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"According to Wenzel, it is problematic when political decisions are shifted onto science.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/on-the-role-of-science-in-times-of-crisis\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"fr_FR\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"On the role of science in times of crisis, bullshitting and the ideal features section - TRANSIT\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"According to Wenzel, it is problematic when political decisions are shifted onto science.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/on-the-role-of-science-in-times-of-crisis\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"TRANSIT\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2024-07-01T13:06:08+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/app\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2024\/07\/UJW_Portraet_2018_1-rotated.jpeg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"240\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"320\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Dur\u00e9e de lecture estim\u00e9e\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"15 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/dialogue\\\/on-the-role-of-science-in-times-of-crisis\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/dialogue\\\/on-the-role-of-science-in-times-of-crisis\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Ronald Schenkel\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/23a3bf6067aaa418434cd148d4553039\"},\"headline\":\"On the role of science in times of crisis, bullshitting and the ideal features section\",\"datePublished\":\"2024-07-01T07:45:23+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-07-01T13:06:08+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/dialogue\\\/on-the-role-of-science-in-times-of-crisis\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":3100,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/dialogue\\\/on-the-role-of-science-in-times-of-crisis\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/app\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/3\\\/2024\\\/07\\\/UJW_Portraet_2018_1-rotated.jpeg\",\"inLanguage\":\"fr-FR\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/dialogue\\\/on-the-role-of-science-in-times-of-crisis\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/dialogue\\\/on-the-role-of-science-in-times-of-crisis\\\/\",\"name\":\"On the role of science in times of crisis, bullshitting and the ideal features section - TRANSIT\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/dialogue\\\/on-the-role-of-science-in-times-of-crisis\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/dialogue\\\/on-the-role-of-science-in-times-of-crisis\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/app\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/3\\\/2024\\\/07\\\/UJW_Portraet_2018_1-rotated.jpeg\",\"datePublished\":\"2024-07-01T07:45:23+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-07-01T13:06:08+00:00\",\"description\":\"According to Wenzel, it is problematic when political decisions are shifted onto science.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/dialogue\\\/on-the-role-of-science-in-times-of-crisis\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"fr-FR\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/dialogue\\\/on-the-role-of-science-in-times-of-crisis\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"fr-FR\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/dialogue\\\/on-the-role-of-science-in-times-of-crisis\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/app\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/3\\\/2024\\\/07\\\/UJW_Portraet_2018_1-rotated.jpeg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/app\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/3\\\/2024\\\/07\\\/UJW_Portraet_2018_1-rotated.jpeg\",\"width\":240,\"height\":320},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/dialogue\\\/on-the-role-of-science-in-times-of-crisis\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Page d\u2019accueil\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Dialogues\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/dialogue\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":3,\"name\":\"On the role of science in times of crisis, bullshitting and the ideal features section\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/\",\"name\":\"TRANSIT\",\"description\":\"\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Thinktank TRANSIT\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"fr-FR\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Think Tank TRANSIT\",\"alternateName\":\"TRANSIT\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"fr-FR\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/app\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/3\\\/2023\\\/06\\\/transit.svg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/app\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/3\\\/2023\\\/06\\\/transit.svg\",\"width\":284,\"height\":48,\"caption\":\"Think Tank TRANSIT\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/23a3bf6067aaa418434cd148d4553039\",\"name\":\"Ronald Schenkel\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"fr-FR\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/1460207732cf86e75fad4e6840dbc52e6aa37d3178729504b966a57cd29a802a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/1460207732cf86e75fad4e6840dbc52e6aa37d3178729504b966a57cd29a802a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/1460207732cf86e75fad4e6840dbc52e6aa37d3178729504b966a57cd29a802a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Ronald Schenkel\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/xeit\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/thinktank-transit.ch\\\/fr\\\/author\\\/ronaldschenkel\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"On the role of science in times of crisis, bullshitting and the ideal features section - TRANSIT","description":"According to Wenzel, it is problematic when political decisions are shifted onto science.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/on-the-role-of-science-in-times-of-crisis\/","og_locale":"fr_FR","og_type":"article","og_title":"On the role of science in times of crisis, bullshitting and the ideal features section - TRANSIT","og_description":"According to Wenzel, it is problematic when political decisions are shifted onto science.","og_url":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/on-the-role-of-science-in-times-of-crisis\/","og_site_name":"TRANSIT","article_modified_time":"2024-07-01T13:06:08+00:00","og_image":[{"width":240,"height":320,"url":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/app\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2024\/07\/UJW_Portraet_2018_1-rotated.jpeg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Dur\u00e9e de lecture estim\u00e9e":"15 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/on-the-role-of-science-in-times-of-crisis\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/on-the-role-of-science-in-times-of-crisis\/"},"author":{"name":"Ronald Schenkel","@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/#\/schema\/person\/23a3bf6067aaa418434cd148d4553039"},"headline":"On the role of science in times of crisis, bullshitting and the ideal features section","datePublished":"2024-07-01T07:45:23+00:00","dateModified":"2024-07-01T13:06:08+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/on-the-role-of-science-in-times-of-crisis\/"},"wordCount":3100,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/on-the-role-of-science-in-times-of-crisis\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/app\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2024\/07\/UJW_Portraet_2018_1-rotated.jpeg","inLanguage":"fr-FR"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/on-the-role-of-science-in-times-of-crisis\/","url":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/on-the-role-of-science-in-times-of-crisis\/","name":"On the role of science in times of crisis, bullshitting and the ideal features section - TRANSIT","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/on-the-role-of-science-in-times-of-crisis\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/on-the-role-of-science-in-times-of-crisis\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/app\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2024\/07\/UJW_Portraet_2018_1-rotated.jpeg","datePublished":"2024-07-01T07:45:23+00:00","dateModified":"2024-07-01T13:06:08+00:00","description":"According to Wenzel, it is problematic when political decisions are shifted onto science.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/on-the-role-of-science-in-times-of-crisis\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"fr-FR","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/on-the-role-of-science-in-times-of-crisis\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"fr-FR","@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/on-the-role-of-science-in-times-of-crisis\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/app\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2024\/07\/UJW_Portraet_2018_1-rotated.jpeg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/app\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2024\/07\/UJW_Portraet_2018_1-rotated.jpeg","width":240,"height":320},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/on-the-role-of-science-in-times-of-crisis\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Page d\u2019accueil","item":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Dialogues","item":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/dialogue\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"On the role of science in times of crisis, bullshitting and the ideal features section"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/#website","url":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/","name":"TRANSIT","description":"","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Thinktank TRANSIT","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"fr-FR"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/#organization","name":"Think Tank TRANSIT","alternateName":"TRANSIT","url":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"fr-FR","@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/app\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2023\/06\/transit.svg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/app\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2023\/06\/transit.svg","width":284,"height":48,"caption":"Think Tank TRANSIT"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/#\/schema\/person\/23a3bf6067aaa418434cd148d4553039","name":"Ronald Schenkel","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"fr-FR","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/1460207732cf86e75fad4e6840dbc52e6aa37d3178729504b966a57cd29a802a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/1460207732cf86e75fad4e6840dbc52e6aa37d3178729504b966a57cd29a802a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/1460207732cf86e75fad4e6840dbc52e6aa37d3178729504b966a57cd29a802a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Ronald Schenkel"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/x.com\/xeit"],"url":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/author\/ronaldschenkel\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/dialogue\/2985","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/dialogue"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/dialogue"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/26"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/dialogue\/2985\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2997,"href":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/dialogue\/2985\/revisions\/2997"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2979"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2985"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"dialogue-category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/dialogue-category?post=2985"},{"taxonomy":"dialogue-tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/thinktank-transit.ch\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/dialogue-tag?post=2985"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}