We are huge fans of Prof. Deborah Lupton’s amazing work on Risk. 2023 will see the publication of the 3rd Edition with Routledge! She shared a sneak peak of her new chapter on Risk Misinformation and Denial with us. Focusing on The Climate and COVID-19 Crises it is a must read for everyone seeking insights into climate and COVID risk skepticism and denialism. Our Illuminate Lab has been focusing intensely on COVID for the past couple of years, so we have found this work very useful.
Thinking about zeitenwende it is implicit that the massive changes afoot are going to change our world and societies in fundamental ways. Change is scary. But, risk doesn’t necessarily mean things will be worse. The technical conception of risk rely on probability estimates of an event are able to be known or knowable, with uncertainty referring to when these probabilities are unknown. The event in question could be positive or negative. A key point is that the event in question has not yet happened. The examples of Y2K, acid rain, and the degradation of the ozone layer are a few which were more prominent in previous decades and have been mitigated.
How the different challenges are entangled leads to emergent potentialities we can not anticipate. One amazing book last year which illustrates how humans can conceive of these potentialities was “AI ten visions for our future 2041” by Kai-Fu Lee and Chen Qiufan. The eruption on the scene of ChatGPT at the end of 2022 is a game-changer in the world of AI. To illustrate this we probed some of the core concepts of Lupton’s book with ChatGPT. The following content was written by ChatGPT in response to the prompts: (1) contrast Ulrich Bech, Mary Douglas and Michel Foucault’s perspectives on risk; (2) explain why there are covid deniers.
“(1) Ulrich Beck, Mary Douglas and Michel Foucault have different perspectives on risk.
Ulrich Beck views risk as a result of modernity and industrialization. He argues that modern societies have increased the overall level of risk by creating new technologies and industries, and that these risks are often not evenly distributed across society. He also suggests that people’s perceptions of risk are shaped by social and cultural factors. Mary Douglas, views risk as a cultural construct. She argues that different societies have different ways of understanding and managing risk, and that these ways are shaped by the society’s cultural values and beliefs.
Michel Foucault views risk as a way for society to exercise power and control over individuals and groups. He argues that society uses the concept of risk as a means of creating and enforcing social norms, and that this process is often used to justify the exercise of power by those in control. In summary, Ulrich Beck views risk as a product of modernity, Mary Douglas views risk as a cultural construct, and Michel Foucault views risk as a tool for societal power and control.
(2) There are several reasons why some people may be COVID-19 deniers. One reason is that misinformation and false information about the virus and its origins have been circulating on social media and other platforms, leading some people to question the legitimacy of the virus and the measures taken to combat it. Another reason is that some people may have a distrust of government and the mainstream media, leading them to reject official information and guidance on the virus.
Some people may also be motivated by political or ideological beliefs, and view acceptance of the virus as a threat to their worldview or agenda. People may be experiencing cognitive dissonance, which is the mental discomfort or stress that people may feel when they are presented with information that conflicts with their existing beliefs. They may be unwilling to accept that the reality of the pandemic is different from what they expected or hoped. Finally, some people may have a psychological need to feel in control and to have a sense of agency and may reject information about the virus as a way of maintaining this sense of control.
It is important to note that these reasons are not mutually exclusive, and that different people may have different motivations for denying the existence or severity of the virus.”
While Lupton’s theses are much more nuanced, elegant and lead to deeper insights, the above text is eerie in its ability to capture many of the key points. As it continues to evolve, this technology may be capable of augmenting, and advancing human’s capacity for integration and syntheses to come up with novel solutions. Perhaps as our risks continue to intensify in their complexity, the technological brave new world may give us the means to be able to deal with them.