← Quick Find
Menü
Alternative perspectives on health as more comprehensive and informed than science
Epistemic relativism, or “the subjectivity of how knowledge is determined”, is a philosophical view that social conventions determine scientific facts. In this viewpoint, facts are subjective and based on historical context, social and cultural norms, and individual standards. From this perspective, there is no objective knowledge. Several forms of epistemic relativism have been linked with vaccine opposition.
For some people, relativism implies that scientific evidence and subjective experiences are equally valuable in generating knowledge, or that personal experiences outweigh evidence. Common expressions of extreme relativism include:
This theme places the individual’s unwarranted belief (e.g., in complementary and alternative medicine, their own traditions) or alternate viewpoints on equal footing with scientific evidence in guiding a vaccination decision.
Modern science is relatively recent and prior to its existence we obtained knowledge through continued experience, traditional beliefs and even good luck. Many of these pre-scientific beliefs include correct or useful ideas, which have facilitated the survival of our ancestors and often has led to more systematic investigation. For example, aspirin was developed based on our previous knowledge of the medicinal properties of the leaves and bark of the willow tree. Inoculation was a common practice in China and India 1,000 years ago.
Dialogue between patients and healthcare professionals is most productive if it is guided by empathy, and an opportunity for the patient to affirm the reasons underlying their attitudes and to express understanding for that. That’s why it is important to understand the attitude roots behind people’s overt opinions. To affirm a person’s underlying attitude root does not mean we need to agree with the specifics of their argument. For example, we can acknowledge that:
Modern science is relatively recent and prior to its existence we obtained knowledge through continued experience, traditional beliefs and even good luck. Many of these pre-scientific beliefs include correct or useful ideas, which have facilitated the survival of our ancestors and often has led to more systematic investigation. For example, aspirin was developed based on our previous knowledge of the medicinal properties of the leaves and bark of the willow tree. Inoculation was a common practice in China and India 1,000 years ago.
Scientific inquiry is extremely comprehensive and scientists are open to incorporating previous knowledge, including traditional beliefs, as long as they provide fruitful insights and can be supported by evidence. Scientific results are replicated and analysed from various points of view.
In addition to being tested using large samples of patients, medical treatments are also assessed in studies focused on minority groups and single patients, as well as in biological, psychological, sociological, anthropological and philosophical research.
Scientific evidence coming from all these fields and methodologies must reinforce each other to be considered well-established knowledge.
Additional information:
Academic references:
English 
French 
Spanish 
German 
Romanian