← Quick Find
Menü
People are experts on their bodies and children (e.g., mother knows best, intuition and instinct)
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 claims that each individual is the expert for themselves, so their personal knowledge should take precedence over medical/scientific experts.
Arguments often invoke the idea of maternal empowerment, claiming that ‘mother knows best’, and encourage people to rely on their instincts and gut feeling instead of doctors.
This theme also highlights individuals having done or doing their own research that is superior to experts or includes information experts don’t know about.
Healthcare professionals and scientists must consider personal preferences and experiences, as testimonials are often useful to discover possible effects that are uncommon or only occur within certain minority groups. Current medical practice is open to patients and their families actively participating in decision-making, which is important to ensure informed consent and achieve greater engagement with treatments.
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:
Healthcare professionals and scientists must consider personal preferences and experiences, as testimonials are often useful to discover possible effects that are uncommon or only occur within certain minority groups. Current medical practice is open to patients and their families actively participating in decision-making, which is important to ensure informed consent and achieve greater engagement with treatments.
Experts reach their decisions based on critical analysis of evidence. To empower ourselves with reliable knowledge, we also need to critically evaluate the information we come across, avoid sources that are intentionally trying to mislead us, and be aware of our own biases and knowledge gaps.
Medicine is such a complex field of knowledge that even professional scientific researchers have to work in large groups so each member can contribute their specific knowledge and skills. Information that is the product of this collective analysis is therefore one of the most reliable sources on which you can base your personal research. It is sensible and smart to put more weight on these sources when making decisions about vaccination.
Additional information:
Academic references:
English 
French 
Spanish 
German 
Romanian