Fraught claims at the intersection of biology and sociality: Managing controversy in the neuroscience of poverty and adversity
| العنوان: | Fraught claims at the intersection of biology and sociality: Managing controversy in the neuroscience of poverty and adversity |
|---|---|
| المؤلفون: | Kasia Tolwinski |
| المصدر: | Social Studies of Science. 49:141-161 |
| بيانات النشر: | SAGE Publications, 2019. |
| سنة النشر: | 2019 |
| مصطلحات موضوعية: | History, Population, 050905 science studies, Cognition, Sociology, History and Philosophy of Science, Eugenics, Humans, 0601 history and archaeology, Social determinants of health, education, Poverty, Sociality, education.field_of_study, Information Dissemination, 05 social sciences, Neurosciences, 1. No poverty, Brain, General Social Sciences, 06 humanities and the arts, Mental health, Epistemology, Mental Health, 060105 history of science, technology & medicine, Categorization, Criticism, 0509 other social sciences |
| الوصف: | In this article, I examine how a subfield of researchers studying the impact of poverty and adversity on the developing brain, cognitive abilities and mental health respond to criticism that their research is racist and eugenicist, and implies that affected children are broken on a biological level. My interviewees use a number of strategies to respond to these resurfacing criticisms. They maintain that the controversy rests upon a fundamental misunderstanding of their work. In addition, they use what I term ‘plasticity talk’, a form of anti-determinist discourse, to put forth what they believe is a hopeful conception of body and brain as fundamentally malleable. They draw attention to their explicit intentions to use scientific inquiry to mitigate inequality and further social justice – in fact, they believe their studies are powerful evidence that add to the literature on the social determinants of health. Though they may be interested in improving lives, they argue that their aims and means have little in common with programs trying to ‘improve’ the genetic stock of the population. I argue that theirs is a fraught research terrain, where any claims-making is potentially treacherous. Just as their studies of development refuse dualistic models, so too do their responses defy dichotomous categorization. |
| تدمد: | 1460-3659 0306-3127 |
| الوصول الحر: | https://explore.openaire.eu/search/publication?articleId=doi_dedup___::eb72a7e13083ccc8b9b3868e3e724969Test https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312719839149Test |
| حقوق: | CLOSED |
| رقم الانضمام: | edsair.doi.dedup.....eb72a7e13083ccc8b9b3868e3e724969 |
| قاعدة البيانات: | OpenAIRE |
| تدمد: | 14603659 03063127 |
|---|