Commentary 3 Climate Science As Culture War

Commentary 3a: Climate Science as Culture War.

Climate Science as Culture War by Hoffman, A. (2012), discusses how the science on climate change has yet to lead to a social consensus. Whilst “the scientific evidence is overwhelming” (Stern, N. 2007) the epicenter of the debate remains between opposing worldviews; from “dooms-day preachers” (Chricton, M. 2006) to those who view climate change as a hoax. Climate change has become entrenched in an opinion war, reducing what is a complex scientific process to personal, political or religious convictions. Whilst both social and scientific issues need to be considered, it is paramount that the separation of climate change from opinion is made clear. This commentary accepts anthropogenic climate change as fact and explores why it is now steeped in “values, morals and ethics,” (Hoffman, A. 2012).

Climate change exists within two distinct paradigms, a scientific discussion and a social context. Whilst both need to be considered equally, they have primarily opposed each other until this point; the science has been too complex and the social aspect too volatile. Consequently, the only way to reach an aligned resolution to climate change is to address the lack of scientific understanding and separate climate change from a political boxing match.

This has caused individuals to become disengaged on the scientific reasoning of climate change and instead rely heavily on their own opinion, values and ethics to reach a conclusion. “We must understand that people’s opinions on this and other complex scientific issues are based on their prior ideological preferences, personal experience, and values,” says Hoffman, A. (2012). Therefore the debate on climate change cannot continue to polarize human society and science, both must be addressed to ensure aligned future action on this