← Quick Find
Menu
Rejection of scientific epistemology and objectivity, claiming that knowledge is relative
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 tends to claim that scientific knowledge, objective evidence, and expertise are all “relative”. The conclusion is typically that science and medicine are wrong or inferior (and, therefore, so are vaccines).
Arguments in this theme may dismiss scientific medicine as:
Concepts like “objectivity” and “truth” have many nuances. It is sometimes difficult to apply them to matters such as art or certain moral decisions. Even in science, there are situations in which different scientists can even come to different conclusions in light of the same evidence.
Potilaiden ja terveydenhuollon ammattilaisten välinen vuoropuhelu on tuottavinta, jos sitä ohjaa empatia ja potilaalla on mahdollisuus saada vahvistusta asenteidensa taustalla oleville syille ja kokea olevansa ymmärretty. Siksi on tärkeää ymmärtää yleisten mielipiteiden takana olevat taustasyyt. Ihmisen asenteen taustalla olevan taustasyyn vahvistaminen ei tarkoita, että meidän olisi oltava samaa mieltä hänen väitteensä kaikista yksityiskohdista. Voimme esimerkiksi tunnustaa, että
Concepts like “objectivity” and “truth” have many nuances. It is sometimes difficult to apply them to matters such as art or certain moral decisions. Even in science, there are situations in which different scientists can even come to different conclusions in light of the same evidence.
In science, it is important to judge evidence based on verifiable criteria, such as how reliable, valid, and replicable the data are. Scientific research is constantly progressing to produce the most reliable knowledge we can obtain. Science has provided us with very accurate explanations and predictions about the world. There are many ways science has improved our lives, such as developing antibiotics, computers and airplanes.
Using the scientific process means we can more reliably judge whether vaccines prevent severe illness and death or not. For life-threatening matters, it is sensible to consider the advice of experts with the relevant skills and knowledge. We consult experts in other matters too, for example, when we fix a car or build a house. In the same way, scientists and medical professionals develop expertise that can help us with health-related matters.
Finnish 
English 
Swedish 
French 
Spanish 
German 
Romanian