Trust,Reliance, and Democracy

Abstract

From the perspective of philosophy and political science it is often pointed out that trust is of central value for democracy. The paper critically examines this claim and argues that we should not overestimate the role of trust in democracy. In order to do that, I argue for a specific understanding of the notion of trust that appropriately accounts for the distinction between trust and mere reliance. In a second step, I argue that we have no reason to put this kind of trust in our elected officials and representatives, but should instead focus on legislative and institutional ways to make sure that they are reliable in particular respects. After contrasting my suggestion with the position of Hardin, I point to two advantages of my account: (1) The avoidance of political analysis through the lens of trust allows us to react more flexibly to unforeseen circumstances and resist populist attempts to emotionalize public debates; (2) at the same time, diffusing the tension between trust and civic vigilance solves a systematic problem in political philosophy. In a concluding section, I briefly discuss the question whether there is an alternative role for trust to play in the field of politics.     

Lost in Translation? The Need for ‘Upstream Engagement’ with Nanotechnology on Trial

Nowadays, the criticism of the so-called ‘deficit model’ and the need for ‘upstream engagement’ in science and technology are becoming part of the master narratives of public policies in many countries, especially concerning nanotechnology. This may be considered as a major success for STS scholars, whose research results have largely contributed to this change, especially those concerning the GMO controversies. Some STS scholars thus move from a position of distant and critical observers to the role of experts in social engineering or advisers of policy-makers. However, in their enthusiasm concerning the expected benefits of upstream engagement, institutions, TA practitioners and social scientists seem to ignore some important limitations as well as the implicit framing assumptions of the concept. Based on an experience made by a group of social scientists in the Grenoble area—one of the major ‘nanodistricts’ in Europe—our paper shows that the ‘upstream engagement’ concept is still embedded in a linear model of innovation and is not very useful to anyone pursuing the co-production of innovations. It is especially true when socio-technical networks are already aligned by powerful actors and a worldwide agenda as in the case of nanotechnology. In order to give an opportunity for public engagement to have a larger impact on decision-making, we propose an alternative approach, which combines Actor–Network Theory (ANT), as an analytical tool, with the reflexive and ongoing implementation of public participation. Public engagement is probably one of the critical loci where STS scholars must reflect on the articulation between the knowledge they produce and public policies in action.     

Countertheses: Communication,material conditions,and future sociocultural development

Chaos in brain function. Edited by Erol Basar Springer‐Verlag, 1990, Berlin. Softcover, 176 pp., 66 figures, index.     

The Role of Government and Lobbying in the Creation of a Health Profession: The Legal Foundations of Counseling

The state and federal governments, along with private industry, play an important role in the development of a health profession. State governments establish training standards through licensure laws, and state programs dictate employment and payment opportunities. The federal government unifies a profession through recognition in national health care programs. Private industry provides public access through private health insurance. The counseling profession has spent decades opening these federal, state, and private programs to become an established health profession.     

Revisiting Westphalia, Discovering Post-westphalia

This article explores the structure of world order fromthe perspective of the Treaty of Westphalia, which is treated asthe benchmark for the emergence of the modern system of sovereignstates. Emphasis is placed on Westphalia as historical event, ideaand ideal, and process of evolution, and also on developments thatsupersede this framing of world politics, especially, globalizationand the megaterrorist challenge of September 11, 2001. At issue is whether the state system is resilient enough to adapt to new globalconditions or is in the process of being supplanted, and whether thesequel to Westphalia is moving toward humane global governance orsome dysutopic variant, or both at once.     

政府信用与政府自觉

政府信用是社会信用的基础和源头,政府信用是社会信用体系建设的关键,因此,政府信用的提高对于提升个人信用和企业信用具有十分重要的意义。政府信用失范是政府信用缺失、信用贫困、信用滥用、信用危机的统称,政府信用失范将会造成政府失效乃至政府失败。在目前政府主导形态下,政府信用的提高和信用危机的克服主要依赖于政府的行为自主性——政府自觉。     

追寻“一只灵巧公正的手”——政府作用与市场公正的新思考

“市场公正”是指市场经济制度本身所蕴涵的，并渗透于各项市场制度制定、执行、监督等环节以及市场机制顺利运行过程中的一种价值或精神。然而，政府的不当作用与干预，极易引起供求、竞争、价格等市场机制的扭曲，造成不公正的利益分配过程和局面，降低市场经济公正程度，损害市场公正。所以，政府应充当一只灵巧公正的手，在确定好政府作用的范围、内容、方式及力度的前提下，对社会经济进行科学适度的干预，在实现市场公正与效率的基础上，追寻更理想的公正与效率。     

契约观念与正当性——一个政治哲学史的视角政治与伦理

作为政治学的重要范畴,契约观念与政治生活中的正当性问题紧紧交织在一起。这一范畴有特定的西方政治哲学传统的背景,并在不同时代语境之中有其不同的内涵和特质。在西方政治发展的不同阶段,契约观念分别与政治服从的必要性、政治权威合法性和政府行为的范围与限度等问题密切相关。契约政治观念体现了人类实现自我治理的理想。     

政府与个人的责任——中国当代医疗改革的责任伦理学剖析

卫生改革的重点必须放在政府部门;公共卫生,预防与初级医疗保健是人类生存的需要,带有鲜明的公益性和福利性。应由政府投资为主筹集资源,以国家投资为主体负担费用,这个层次的卫生服务产品,属非商品经济部分,并不以赢利为目的,不能引进市场经济,个人对健康负有重要责任,包括：选择医疗保健,决定花费数额,生活方式和卫生习惯的养成,主动接受健康教育,抵抗压力,支持国家与地区的卫生保健政策;个人对自身健康负责是一种道德责任,健商（health quotient)这一重要概念,具有伦理价值和普遍的医学人类学意义;个人对健康负责是一种社会风尚。     

开放医疗市场 强化政府责任 解决看病难

当前对医疗改革的批评较多,不少人认为是过度市场化的结果。但是,“过度市场化”的问题不能一概而论,可以从两个方面来分析,从医疗服务方面来说,有过度市场化的倾向;但是从医疗资源的配置或投入来说,市场又没有充分放开。所以不能简单的或笼统的把医改的问题归咎于市场化。该开放的医疗市场未开放,政府责任不到位,才是当前中国医疗改革的问题所在。