Manufacturing Refused Knowledge in the Age of Epistemic Pluralism : Discourses, Imaginaries, and Practices on the Border of Science

This open access book explores contemporary practices that challenge science, arguing that this matter cannot be simply disregarded as a new manifestation of “anti-scientism”. It scrutinizes the processes through which knowledge claims, refused by established institutions and the scientific community, seek legitimacy. Assuming an agnostic analytical stance, it explores the actors involved in such processes and their social worlds, their interactions with epistemic institutions, and the ways in which they enact such refused knowledge in their daily lives. Drawing on a three-year mixed-method research project, this collection demonstrates how refused knowledge can be seen as a distinct mode of knowing, employed in response to the uncertainties of everyday life. Thus, it offers a deeper understanding not only of how refused knowledge garners credibility, but also of how knowledge at large – including scientific knowledge – emerges from specific sociotechnical assemblages. Acknowledgements About This Book Contents Notes on Contributors List of Figures List of Tables 1: Introduction: Manufacturing Knowledge at the Border of Science 1.1 Introduction: Manufacturing Knowledge at the Border of Science References 2: Can We Look at Refused Knowledge Differently? 2.1 Introduction 2.2 Labelling, Positioning, Knowing: The Symmetry Principle in Exploring Refused Knowledge 2.3 Point of View as a Matter of Theoretical Framework 2.4 Claim Legitimisation Strategies 2.5 Conclusions: Why Should We Take RKCs Seriously? References 3: Embracing Refused Knowledge: The Turning Processes 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Turning as a Process 3.3 Conversion Does Not Equate to Awakening 3.4 Transition Drivers 3.4.1 Tests, Treatments and Protocols 3.4.2 Social Relationships and Family Background 3.4.3 Education 3.4.4 The Media 3.4.5 Personal Dispositions 3.5 The Turning Process Is Not Driven by an Anti-scientific Stance 3.6 The Role of a Para-Scientific Legitimisation of Knowledge 3.6.1 Reasons for Believing in Refused Knowledge 3.6.2 Reasons for Adhering to Refused Knowledge 3.6.3 Reasons for Not Believing in Parts of Refused Knowledge 3.7 The Moral Career of Refused-Knowledge Supporters 3.8 Conclusion References 4: Us and Them: Martyrs, Prophets and Mythic Narratives of Refused Knowledge 4.1 Introduction 4.2 Scientific Myths, Mythic Science and Founding Narratives 4.3 The Martyrs of Refused Knowledge 4.4 In the Name of the Prophet: The Ryke Geerd Hamer Archetype and the Birth of the Five Biological Laws Community 4.4.1 Revelation 4.4.2 Conversion and Persecution 4.4.3 Exile, Death and Commemoration 4.4.4 Schism and False Prophets 4.5 Between Us and Them References 5: From Scientific to Syncretic Patchwork Storytelling: The Discursive Ecosystem of Italian Stop 5G Refused Knowledge Communities 5.1 Introduction 5.2 A Media Ecosystem Approach to RKC Discursive Shared Belief Production 5.3 Contesting 5G Deployment: From Scientific to Syncretic Patchwork Storytelling 5.3.1 RKC as a Network of Independent Scientists: the Adoption of a Scientific Patchwork Storytelling Strategy (2017–2018) 5.3.2 The Activist Phase: Guarding the Borders of Scientific Patchwork Storytelling (2018–2020) 5.3.3 Enter the Virus (February–April 2020) 5.3.4 The Populist Turn and the Adoption of Syncretic Patchwork Storytelling (The Remainder of 2020) 5.4 Conclusion References 6: Disentangling Discursive Spaces of Knowledge Refused by Science: An Analysis of the Epistemic Structures in the Narratives Repertoires on Health During the Covid-19 Pandemic 6.1 Introduction 6.2 Analysing Spaces of Epistemic Enrolment Within RK Social Worlds 6.3 Methodology and Data 6.4 Analysis 6.4.1 The Structure of Discursive Universes Legitimising RK Within the Alkaline Water RKC 6.4.2 The Structure of Discursive Universes Legitimising RK Within the Five Biological Laws RKC 6.4.3 Combining the Network Structures of the Two RKCs 6.5 Discussion and Conclusions: Disassembling and Re-assembling Science References 7: Challenging the Institutional Politics of Life in the Making of Refused Knowledge 7.1 Introduction 7.2 Contesting Contemporary Politics of Life in the Legitimisation of Refused Knowledge 7.3 The Institutional Configuration of the Politics of Life Under the RKC Lens 7.3.1 RKCs Challenging the Alignment of the Normal and the Pathological 7.3.2 Contesting the Professional Arrangements of Scientific Biomedicine 7.4 Uncovering (Allegedly) Hidden Truths in Challenges to the Politics of Life References 8: “This is the real face of Covid-19!”: How Refused Knowledge Communities Entered the Pandemic Arena 8.1 Introduction 8.2 Dealing With Competing Narratives and Actors in the Public Covid-19 Pandemic Arena 8.3 Pandemic Objects and Their Counter Narrative 8.4 Building Alliances, Organising Dissent: Experts and Impostors as Boundary Objects 8.5 The Rise of New Refused Knowledge Social Worlds in the Pandemic Arena 8.6 Following Pandemic Objects and Discovering New Social Worlds References 9: Do the Media Refuse Refused Knowledge? 9.1 Introduction 9.2 Public Communication of Science and Technology: Some of the Lessons Learned About Institutionalisation Trajectories via the Media 9.3 Alternative Knowledge in the Public Domain 9.4 Refused Knowledge Communities in Italian Daily Newspapers: Coverage 9.5 Between Institutionalisation and Discrediting: Keeping Social Worlds Apart Discursively 9.6 Conclusions References 10: Respecifying Fieldwork: Refused Knowledge Communities Explored Through the Reflexive Lens 10.1 Introduction 10.2 Negotiating Relationships with RKCs as a Matter of Reflexivity 10.3 The Complicated Relationship Between RKCs and Academic Researchers 10.3.1 ‘You are a Charlatan!’: Academic Researchers as Imposters 10.3.2 Are You Recruiting Them or Are They Recruiting You? Exploiting Researchers 10.4 Conclusion References 11: Conclusion: Is It Really Possible to Take the Floor (Agnostically) About Refused Knowledge? 11.1 Conclusion: Is It Really Possible to Speak (Agnostically) About Refused Knowledge? 11.1.1 Refused Knowledge Communities and Us 11.2 “Taking a Stance Without Taking a Side”: Testing the Harambam Methodological Stance References Index As a consequence, taking refused knowledge seriously helps not only to better understand the legitimation processes that confer credibility to knowledge claims otherwise refused, but also to analyse how knowledge is, at large, the result of sociotechnical assemblages. The book thus offers a relevant contribution for scholars and students from a range of disciplines interested in the understanding of the changing relations between science, expertise and society, including Science and Technology Studies, Sociology, Media Studies, Cultural Studies, and Anthropology. At the same time, it also speaks to a wider audience concerned with the public debate over the supposed crisis of scientific expertise in the post-truth era, as well as the current mistrust towards the political and scientific establishment and their knowledge.