The wife and I have a ‘nuclear option’ in our infrequent bickerings, namely “whatever you need to tell yourself”. It’s such a supreme asshole move that we use it either sparingly or tongue-in-cheek. Because, after all, it is a claim to superior knowledge over someone else’s ‘false consciousness‘, isn’t it? And indifference to that view, saying basically “I don’t even care enough to un-knot your delusions because they (and you, by extension) are simply irrelevant.” Yowsers.
Anyway, thought of that when I saw this abstract, which looks a corker. If I read the article, I’ll review or course.
Lefsrud, L. and Meyer, R. 2012. Science or Science Fiction? Professionals’ Discursive Construction of Climate Change. Organization Studies 33 (11) pp. 1477– 1506.
This paper examines the framings and identity work associated with professionals’ discursive construction of climate change science, their legitimation of themselves as experts on ‘the truth’, and their attitudes towards regulatory measures. Drawing from survey responses of 1077 professional engineers and geoscientists, we reconstruct their framings of the issue and knowledge claims to position themselves within their organizational and their professional institutions. In understanding the struggle over what constitutes and legitimizes expertise, we make apparent the heterogeneity of claims, legitimation strategies, and use of emotionality and metaphor. By linking notions of the science or science fiction of climate change to the assessment of the adequacy of global and local policies and of potential organizational responses, we contribute to the understanding of ‘defensive institutional work’ by professionals within petroleum companies, related industries, government regulators, and their professional association.