Anders Kristian Munk - University: Aalborg University, Copenhagen - Type: Master Thesis - Pages: 139
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Author: Daniel Bach - Study number: 20135105 - Supervisor: Anders Kristian Munk - University: Aalborg University, Copenhagen - Type: Master thesis - Pages: 139. Abstract Konceptet ‘post-faktualitet’ er i højere og højere grad blevet relevant i den samfundsmæssige og akademiske debat. Dette speciale undersøger en af de mest ekstreme af sådanne grupper i dansk kontekst - det danske Flat Earth fællesskab. Dette fællesskab søges afklaret på egne emiske præmisser med henblik på at skabe en forståelse for hvordan et så ekstremt tilfælde af det post-faktuelle kan opretholdes som del i et samfund der har så anderledes holdninger. Denne afklaring skabes igennem at belyse fællesskabet ud fra to nøglekoncepter - kosmologi og rationalitet. Disse to sammenhængende koncepter tegner et billede af hvordan Flat Earth kosmologien opbygges og hvordan denne bruges til at rationalisere en epistemisk kultur så vel som at rationalisere den sociale virkelighed Flat Eartherne opfatter. Gennem et større etnografisk feltarbejde foretaget hovedsageligt på Facebook belyser dette speciale hvordan det danske Flat Earth fællesskab opfatter Jorden som en flad, stationær disk, indkapslet i en dome og omkranset af en is mur. Igennem en analyse af hvordan deres kosmologi påvirker Flat Earth fællesskabets videnskabelig rationalitet, kommer dette speciale frem til at denne videnskabelige rationalitet praktiserer en form for relativistisk realisme. Med dette menes der at der at det danske Flat Earth fællesskab opfatter en objektiv sandhed, men at den måde dette bliver rationaliseret på igennem en epistemisk praksis bærer mere præg af en relativistisk tilgang. Ydermere analyseres Flat Earth fællesskabets samfundsmæssige rationalitet i forhold til koncepterne ansvarspålæggelse og risiko. Igennem denne analyse vises der hvordan at der gennem Flat Earth kosmologien rationaliseres en forandring i social ansvarpålæggelse og risiko i sådan en forstand at disse begreber bliver mere orienteret mod en specifik handlende aktør og dermed virker mindre tilfældige. 2 Til slut diskuteres Flat Earth kosmologien op imod den kosmologi der bliver præsenteret den normative videnskab, som hos Flat Earth fællesskabet forstås som værende meningsløs og designet med henblik på at afholde dem fra spirituel oplysning. Omvendt bliver Flat Earth kosmologien i diskussionen beskrevet som en måde at repositionere sig eksistentielt i en geo- og antropocentrisk forståelse af universet. Til slut konkluderes det at kosmologien spiller en meget stor rolle i at understøtte de rationaliteter, i det at denne muliggør at rationalisere på den måde der er beskrevet i analyserne. Omvendt konkluderes det at rationaliteterne samtidig opretholder kosmologien ved at gøre denne attraktiv fordi denne kan afstedkomme rationliteter der kan nedsætte risiko og tillader en eksistentiel repositionering. 3 Abstract 2 Introduction and problem analysis 6 Post-truth 6 Post-truth from a perspective outside the mainstream 8 The Danish Flat Earth Community 10 Cosmology, rationality and problem analysis. 13 Cosmology 13 Rationality 15 Problem Analysis 17 Methodology 20 Introduction 20 Framing the field site 21 Table 1: Different Flat Earth spaces that constitute the field site 26 Applied ethnographic methods 30 Agnosticism and generalized symmetry 31 Reflections on ethnography in mediated communications 32 Ethnographic immersion on a social media platform 33 Observation and participation 37 Observational focus 37 Observing cosmological elements 37 Observing scientific rationality 39 Social Rationality 39 Participation 39 Fieldnotes 43 Interviews 45 Face-to-face interviews 45 Textual interview 46 Agile ethics of care 47 Cosmological outline 50 The Flat Earth 51 The Icewall and beyond 53 Astral bodies and The Dome 54 Agnotology on a Flat Earth 58 Scientific frauds 58 Political frauds and the Flat Earth as an umbrella for conspiracy theories 61 The Conspirator 63 4 The Danish Flat Earth Community 69 Community characteristics 70 Danish Flat Earth and the world 72 Globeheads 74 Danish Flat Earth as an epistemic culture 75 Mobile Flat Earth facts 78 Experimentation 83 Ships and the horizon 85 Looking beyond the curve 89 Flat Earth clues 94 The faulty lies of outer space 95 Bubbles in space 96 100 Danish Flat Earth philosophy of science 101 Good scientific norms of Danish Flat Earth research 102 The concepts of belief and theory 106 Truth and Danish Flat Earth relativist realism 108 The social rationality of Danish Flat Earthers 110 Flat Earth social spaces as an un-Thing 110 Social rationality in relation to accountability 112 Danish Flat Earth social rationality and risk 118 Being a Flat Earther in the risk society 119 Summary 125 Meaning in competing cosmologies 126 Conclusion 129 Bibliography 134 5 Introduction and problem analysis In this chapter, I outline why I have chosen to write this thesis and what overarching academic debates it is meant as an intervention into. I also analyze the problem at the heart of this thesis, breaking it down into the elements through which I wish to approach it and finally, gather those elements into a problem statement. Post-truth In recent years the terms ‘post-truth’ or ‘post-factual’ has gained attention in the academic and political discourse of the West. These terms cover the notions of ‘true’ facts being in decline, and that elements of society are distancing themselves from traditional knowledge authorities such as reliable ‘mainstream’ journalism and academic institutions. The debate on the post-truth society covers a wide range of symptoms, from politicians ignoring scientific perspectives, over ‘fake news’ to the denial of mainstream science found in climate skeptics, anti-vaxxers, and Flat Earthers etc. The idea of post-truth is so popular that it was even made ‘word of the year’ by the Oxford Dictionary in 2016 who defines it thus: “Relating to or denoting circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief.” (Oxford Dictionaries, 2016) As is well know in Science and Technology Studies (STS) the notion of ‘objective facts’ requires some unpacking as to how they are constituted - and for whom. A paraphrasing of Bruno Latour, as one of the foremost STS scholars, might be: All facts are constructed, but not all facts are constructed equal (Latour, 2010:474). Scholarly debate is split on the root cause(s) of the post-truth phenomena, but much of the discussion seems to point at the internet, and especially social media platforms as being a set of spaces where post-truth society flourishes (Hendricks and Vestergård, 2017). As the internet 6 enables people to seek out information, some of this information is based on disputed narratives that are outside of the mainstream understanding. These narratives come as part of the mediated content feeds that are known as social media platforms, such as Facebook. One of the most popular arguments in the post-truth discussion is concerned with the concept of filter bubbles (Pariser, 2011). The argument describes the negative impact of algorithmically curated ‘bubbles’ of narratives and how, since this algorithmic curation only shows a user content within a narrative they already agree with, this process enforces and exacerbates unnuanced views. This notion has however been critiqued for taking a view of the individual user as being without agency in the face of (social media) content curation algorithms (Madsen, 2016). The trouble with the idea of the filter bubbles, and ideas like it, is that it presupposes a lack of knowledge and a lack of agency for the individual, chalking post-truth related issues up to the workings of the internet. In turn, it has also been argued that discourse concerning post-truth is “old wine in new bottles” (Bach et al., 2018a). This should be understood in the sense that post-truth activities that play around with the perception of facts or exist outside of mainstream truths have always existed. The discussion around post-truth presupposes that the post-truth society exists in a time after a society that in some way was more truthful, a claim that is dubious at best. However one likes to imagine the possible degradation of a truthful society, the current issuefication or making an issue of, post-truth as a concept can be viewed as a positive thing, in the sense that it is being debated, studied and reflected on. This is the view taken as a point of departure in this thesis, seeking to intervene into the academic debate on post-truth in the conceptual sense, by creating a better understanding of how some performers of post-truth rationalize and why they exist. Post-truth from a perspective outside the mainstream Within the groups being labeled as performers of post-truth politics, the issuefication of the post-truth phenomena has been seen as a way for the mainstream, or ‘power elite’, to crack down on the fringe elements telling the ‘truth’. 7 Image 1: An example of fake news being framed as a way for authority to crack down alternative knowledge. These differences in narratives are not a new field of study and what might be termed ‘the politics of knowledge’ have existed as an object of study since the early days of STS. A view one might take on these knowledge controversies is that they arise in situations when groups of people open up for discussion of something that much of the rest of society considers a matter of fact. Latour (2004) distinguishes between these two views by calling them either a matter of concern; something that is up for discussion, or a matter of fact; something that is generally agreed upon. Something can be viewed as a matter of fact in groups where a fact is so stable that it is not questioned but taken for granted - as an example, this could in most groups be exemplified by a view that the Earth is a globe. A matter of concern then is when something is up for debate and many different concerns are represented in such a debate.