What is this thing called risk
What is that thing?
Such questions we found permanently in our relationships with other humans who try to perceive phenomena surrounding environment, be it natural or artificial. It is perhaps the first question of our children, the safety of their parents find answers to those things in the world still do not understand. What is that?, Is a question repeatedly in my two years. That's a library, that is a tree, that is a computer, are the answers to your questions. Only when you extend the description of the thing in question: that's a library, where books are kept, the books are ..., the question ceases, demonstrating perhaps a spirit child satisfaction in their research.
What is this thing called science? Is the title of a book by Alan Chalmers in 1976, but more than answer the question raises other questions such as the nonexistence of a method to prove that scientific theories are true, this book constitutes an excellent introductory text to the philosophy of science. "What is mathematics? E s a book by Courant and Robbins in 1941, but not directly answer our question, its value lies in how readers about the mathematics, be they beginners, specialists, teachers, engineers and philosophers. Einstein himself regarded this book as "a brilliant exposition of key concepts and methods throughout the field of mathematics" [1]
What is science? It is a question that generates debate and discussion about its response. León Olivé in his book "The good, the bad and reason", considers a question metascientific, which tries to respond from outside science. There are three disciplines, according to Oliver, who care to analyze this question: the history of science, sociology of science and philosophy of science.
The concepts of general science and math particular can not be defined. Against the tendency to define "the indefinable", the Roman jurists were wise and radically contrary to the definitions, for them, a definition was dangerous or as expressed Olivé: "any attempt to do, namely to establish conditions and enough that something must satisfy to qualify as science, risk cover too much or stop much out. " The definitions are tools of linguistic clarification (just take a look to the dictionary) and sometimes the definitions are the result of conceptual analysis, but not the procedure to get the essence of the thing, the reality of that thing.
What is this thing called risk?
One of the most important debates on science and technology, is that in recent decades revolves around the concept of "risk." There is no agreement theory between what is meant by risk. It is a concept exposed to social discussions, policies and techniques.
From the technical view, risk is defined as the probability of occurrence of an event with a positive or negative, the negative being the most associated with risk. This "objective risk" experts, framed in economic and political dimensions, hidden social dimension of risk, under the false assumption of cognitive deficits lay public, which since its "subjectivity" only generates movement against scientific and technological developments.
The truth is that in general there is no clear notion of what the risk. Its etymological origin tends to be confused with the word danger: Risk (in English), rischio (in Italian), risque (French), risiko (in German) and risk (in English) from the "danger" that represented the marine rocks (cliffs) to the sailors. Recently I urged León Olivé to philosopher asked a Chinese student, stay at the Instituto Tecnológico Metropolitano de Medellín, about what they understand by risk in China. The general confusion, risk in China is "endangered" its ideogram is a knife. However, once you Olivé clarifies what he meant by risk, "a situation or event which brings into play something valuable for human beings, including humans themselves, and where the outcome is uncertain" [2] , our Chinese friend replied: "Ah! So risk is a potential danger. "
The sociologist Anthony Giddens, calls attention to the difference between hazard and risk, "hazard and risk are closely related, but not the same thing. The difference not a function of whether or not an individual consciously weigh alternatives to supplement or take a course of action. It assumes that the risk is the danger, not necessarily the same danger, for his part Niklas Luhmann, in Sociology of Risk said that "exposure to a hazard is a risk (potential risk) ... There is no ultimate authority - even invisible - that would settle the uncertainty known risk. " The uncertainty itself, gives a subjective character called "objective risk" subjective probability "risk target" fosters a misperception of risk. The risk is not is real, is only a probability, a prediction and sometimes, as in the hazards of biotechnology, an uncertainty.
risk Other scholars are not agreed to make a distinction between "objective risk" of experts and the "moral hazard" of us laymen, Shrader-Frechette, Olivé, López Cerezo, Douglas and Wildavsky, among others, are in uncertainty and risk perception, two key elements to eliminate this distinction. The terrorist attack of September 11, 2001, reflects one's perception risk experts and laymen, is no longer a probability, not a calculated risk, is "the risk come true."
From the technical approach is rescued concepts underlying an understanding of the concept of risk and a possible consensus between experts and lay people: the threat, vulnerability and impact. Independent formulas or sophisticated statistical models employed by financial experts, engineers, technologists, administrators, health professionals, these concepts only require some attention to understand that the greater threat and a greater vulnerability of biophysical cultural or social impact is greatest. But not to be confused with risk impact, has so called "risk become a reality, a name that comes more from the perception of risk that the risk itself. Nor can confuse threat to the event, an earthquake per se is not a threat, an earthquake of magnitude 8.0 on the Richter scale and with a relatively shallow focus close to a city whose buildings are vulnerable, it is clearly a threat to the city , clearly by the recent experiences in disaster aged, vulnerable because there is no building "earthquake."
around the concept of vulnerability exists greater consensus. Vulnerability is linked directly to loss or damage (impact) that can result in the presence of a threat. UNDRO [3] defined as the degree of loss of an element or group of elements at risk resulting from the likely occurrence of a disastrous event, expressed on a scale from 0 or without damage to 1 or total loss. In general the vulnerability reflects the level of exposure to the threat, a roofless house is vulnerable to rain, which may not generate losses but if an injury, discomfort or temporary impairment to the inhabitants of the house, a computer without an updated antivirus program is vulnerable to new viruses, the cognitive impairment of the lay public we deal with the consequences generated by the presence of avian influenza in Asia and Europe, is a vulnerability of social and economic.
Experts evaluate the risk from these three concepts, the first two (threat and vulnerability), known risk factors and the third for what it is to anticipate. " The magnitude of expected impacts of an event, if it occurs, and the probability of the event and its associated consequences, are evaluated in the context of existing controls. The consequences and probabilities are combined to produce a level of risk. These impacts and probabilities can be estimated using statistical analysis and calculations or alternatively subjective estimates that reflect the degree of conviction of an individual or group that may occur particular event or result "(Australian Standard Risk Management , AS / NZS 4360:1999).
Without falling into cultural relativism Douglas and Wildavsky, who argue that " views on the risk of non-experts are of the same value as that of the experts " the fact is that in a democratic society, "perceived risk" by the lay public, should be taken into account. Experts from their desks can not ignore the social dimension of risk, without trying to reject the knowledge of scientific methods to provide risk assessment but this assessment public participation is, in the words of Oliver, ethically essential.
Given the magnitude of the doubt about the risk itself, it is foolish not to consider the public perception of risk!
[ 1] "A lucid representation of the fundamental concepts and methods of the whole field of mathematics. It is an easily understandable introduction for the layman and helps to give the mathematical student a general view of the basic principles and methods."--Albert Einstein (on the first edition)
[2] León Olive in "The democratization of science from an ethical perspective", p.8
[3] UNDRO United Nations Disaster Relief Organization ( United Nations Office for Disaster Relief, now OCHA)
0 comments:
Post a Comment