Does risk exist, and if it does, where does it live and how do we find it?. Doug Crawford-Brown Professor of Environmental Sciences and Policy Director, UNC Institute for the Environment UNC-Chapel Hill and Energy and Environment Networks Cambridge, U.K.
Does risk exist, and if it does, where does it live and how do we find it?
Professor of Environmental Sciences and Policy
Director, UNC Institute for the Environment
Energy and Environment Networks
Yes, this is toluene.
My first claim:Risk involves some confluence of these locations and properties, although it EXPRESSES itself in the health of a population (e.g. incidence of disease)
My second claim:The world does not contain risk. It contains outcomes and causes. Our minds contain the risk because we are uncertain what outcome will occur. But this risk is of the psychologistic, not subjective, kind.
My third claim:While risk might ultimately be psychologistic, it must result from (i) scientific methodologies to engage the world and (ii) methodologies of rational assessment of beliefs about that world.
Scientific assessment: input output
What is your best estimate of the risk?
What Is (the risk)?
What Ought to Be (the risk)?
How do You Know (the risk)?
My fifth claim:I am not confusing risk with the perception of, or estimation of risk. I am saying that risk IS a rational perception of the world.
(Obtained from a jointly scientific and philosophical process)
A second: Bernstein and dialogical rationality
“…stresses the character of this rationality in which there is choice, deliberation, interpretation, judicious weighing and application of universal criteria, and even rational disagreement about which criteria are relevant and most important.”
Intellectual Obligation(i) the degree to which a specific mode of reasoning must be available to increase epistemic status above minimal epistemic statusand(ii) the degree to which a specific mode of reasoning must be weighted into the final analysis of epistemic status for each belief.
My seventh claim:Judgment is part of the ontology of risk, but it must be a structured judgment rooted in scientific observation with valid underlying reasons clearly stated and discussed.