Scientific language’s exclusionary conventions undermine democratic environmental dialogue

Evidence

And yet scientists mostly convey these stories in a language that excludes readers. Conventions for efficiency and precision make reading scientific papers very difficult for the rest of the world, and if the truth be known, for us as well. This has serious consequences for public dialogue about the environment and therefore for real democracy, especially the democracy of all species. For what good is knowing, unless it is coupled with caring? Science can give us knowing, but caring comes from someplace else. — Robin Wall Kimmerer, Braiding Sweetgrass, 1266

Categorization

• XREF: Direct bridge to Reading the Landscape’s method (observation needs a shared language) and ‘real democracy of all species’ pulls in Legal Systems’ standing-for-nature thread. — connects to: Monolingual Spanish residents were excluded by an untranslated environmental review — Luke W. Cole and Sheila R. Foster, From the Ground Up: Environmental…, 72; Ecological reflexivity opens democratic decision-making to excluded environmental viewpoints — David Schlosberg, Defining Environmental Justice:…, 650; Legal language can function as democratic liberation for excluded groups (+4 more)
• SEED: Article angle on science communication as a democracy problem, not merely a comprehension problem — who is excluded from the environmental conversation.

Broader Connections

• Ecological reflexivity opens democratic decision-making to excluded environmental viewpoints #responds-to (0.85) — David Schlosberg, Defining Environmental Justice, 650
• Legal language can function as democratic liberation for excluded groups #complicates (0.82)
• Rules governing scientific discourse are prescriptive, not denotative, claims #expands (0.80) — Jean-François Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition, 448
• Positive science supplied a model of uncoerced communication supporting democracy #contradicts (0.78) — James W. Carey, Communication as Culture- Essays on…, 425
• Scientific legitimation rests on consensus among experts about language rules #expands (0.75) — Jean-François Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition, 324