diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'chapter4.md')
| -rw-r--r-- | chapter4.md | 10 |
1 files changed, 5 insertions, 5 deletions
diff --git a/chapter4.md b/chapter4.md index dd4dba1..50aa5c7 100644 --- a/chapter4.md +++ b/chapter4.md @@ -104,7 +104,7 @@ industry, was to not only bring about regulation, but end an era of unquestioning trust in government agencies and chemical companies. She exposed that they hadn't done their homework or had lied. In a Cold War context, questioning the techno-scientific-industrial authorities could be perceived as -traitorous. Chemical companies fought hard against her, sued the publishers to +traitorous. The industry fought hard against her, sued the publishers to try and prevent it being published, then spent a quarter of a million dollars on an aggressive publicity campaign against her. She was attacked for being 'emotional' and an 'hysterical woman.' The fact she had published novels was @@ -113,22 +113,22 @@ writing style as evidence that what she was writing couldn't be real science. Carson had no PhD, no academic institution, and no network of scientific colleagues to back her up. [@silent-spring, pp. 122-124] -To fight the chemical industry, Carson had to adopt minority epistemology. So, +To fight the chemical lobby, Carson had to adopt minority epistemology. So, alongside her considerable arsenal of traditional scientific facts, she included in her book historical facts based on lived experience, with no attempt to fit them into clearly-defined quantifiable metrics in the scientific style favoured -by the chemical industry. One unforgettable example was her report of a +by the chemical companies. One unforgettable example was her report of a parathion poisoning incident. First, agricultural workers who had sprayed parathion on crops fell sick. After that, the physicians who treated them fell sick too. Finally, the same illness struck the hospital staff who had washed the patients' clothes. [@silent-spring, p. 27] -Like John, Carson was also forced to undermine the chemical industry's majority +Like John, Carson was also forced to undermine a majority epistemology. In _Silent Spring_, she showed how the chemical industry funded the same science which enabled its profits. She undermined their conceptual frameworks, arguing that the use of words like 'pesticide' and 'insecticide' function to mask the truth that the chemicals involved are in fact poisons. And -she showed how the chemical lobby used science to dismiss valid first-hand +she showed how the industry used science to dismiss valid first-hand experiences and impose their solutions on people against their interests and expressed desires. For instance, she told the story of Joseph Sweeny, a forestry official in Ohio, who, in opting for a targeted approach to containing dutch elm |