Philosophy of Risk
San Francisco State University
Spring 2015
PHIL 351.01
Tue & Thu 2:10pm – 3:25pm Location: Humanities building 115 |
Course description
This course explores a broad range of questions surrounding the notion of risk. For example, what do we mean by risk? Is risk objective or subjective? When facing a potential risk, should we wait to have full scientific certainty before taking preventive measures? Do emotions help or hinder detection of risk? Do we have a right not to be exposed to risks? Are we all exposed to the same risks? How can we make better decisions about risk? What do we mean when we say that a certain group of people is at a higher risk of developing a disease? How do experts measure risks associated with new technologies? How is risk communicated to the public? Should experts and authorities nudge us to help us make better decisions about risks? How is discrimination related to risk and health? What can philosophy teach us about risk? We will apply the conceptual tools of philosophy to dissect these (and other) questions, and to examine examples of environmental and health risks.
Students learning outcomes
Students will learn basic concepts of risk analysis and develop a critical approach to environmental and health risks. Towards the end of the semester, students will be able to ask new and better questions about the risks we are exposed to.
Course requirements
Students are expected to attend all classes, read all the materials (which will be made available online), to participate in the required discussions and to make the most of the lectures by paying attention and taking notes.
Course evaluation
3 celebrations of learning: 65% total
12 pop quizzes: 10% total
1 discussion report: 15%
5 discussion questions: 10% total
Celebrations of Learning: There will be three in-class closed-book tests. Each will consist of a combination of multiple choice, fill-in-the-gap and short answer questions.
Celebration of Learning #1 & #2: 20% of final grade each.
Celebration of Learning #3: 25% of final grade.
Pop quizzes: There will be 12 short pop quizzes throughout the semester. They will be graded pass/fail, and they can happen on any day (including discussion sessions). Only 10 of these quizzes will count towards your grade, which means you can miss two of them without penalty. I won’t accept any excuses for missing more than two. Completing all 12 will not result in extra credit.
Discussion reports: Each student is required to write a short report (no longer than a page, one-sided) about one of the group discussions (there are 5 discussion sessions; only one report per student is required). These reports should reflect one or more of the questions (not all of them) discussed by the group. The reports are not expected to propose a solution to the problems that were addressed during the discussion. These reports are an opportunity to express your understanding of the topic.
An example of a poor report: a list of disconnected questions in a bullet-point format.
An example of a good report: a description of one question that was discussed, and a critical comment on that question (how it relates to materials discussed in class, how some of the solutions proposed during the discussion fail or succeed in addressing it).
You can maximize your chances to write a good report by taking notes during the discussion. Discussion reports must be submitted by 11:55 pm the day after the discussion; for example, if the discussion takes place on a Thursday, the deadline to submit discussion reports is Friday 11:55pm.
Discussion questions: These are questions about the discussion readings that students must bring to each discussion session. These questions might express doubts about the reading, critiques of the reading, or some thoughts about how that reading relates to the material we covered in class or to some personal experience. Discussion questions must be posted on iLearn (detailed instructions will be given in class) no later than 24 hours before each discussion, to allow time for the moderators to collect and process them (for example, if the discussion is on Tuesday at 2:10pm, the deadline is Monday 2:10pm). Each question is worth 2% of your final grade. They will be graded on a 0-1 scale (0: non-existent or irrelevant; 1: relevant).
Instructions for discussion sessions: There are two roles a student might take in discussions: participant or moderator. Each student must be a moderator in one of the discussion sessions, and a participant in the remaining four sessions.
Duties of participants: participants must bring, in a written format, one question about the reading assigned for the discussion. They must post their questions on iLearn 24 hours before the discussion session, and bring their questions to class the day of the discussion session.
Duties of moderators: moderators have 4 important tasks to fulfill. First, they are in charge of collecting all the discussion questions from their group members (which will be made available on iLearn 24 hours before the discussion session), and bring the list to class (printed or saved on a laptop/tablet). Second, moderators should not forget to submit their own discussion questions for the discussion session they are moderating. Third, moderators must make sure that everyone in their group takes their turn in the discussion. Finally, they must write a report about their group discussion, and submit it by 11:55pm the day after the discussion session.
The discussion sessions work as follows: The class will be randomly divided in groups. These groups will be the same for all the discussions. Each student must bring one question to the discussion (in some written format), moderators included. At the beginning of the session, each student will have one minute of uninterrupted time to pose their question. Make sure the student posing their question prior to yours has said “I’m finished” before starting to speak, and make sure you say “I’m finished” after posing your own question. After everyone has posed their question, open discussion starts.
Important: Sign up to be a moderator! You can do it on the course website on iLearn.
Students who want to be moderators for discussion session #1 should sign up by February 5 2015. Discussion reports for session #1 will receive extra credit. To be a moderator for one of the following discussion sessions (#2-#5), sign up by February 19 2015. Readings for discussion sessions will be posted online one week before each discussion.
Attendance and participation
Regular attendance is expected. Pop quizzes will be used to monitor and give credit for attendance.
Behavior in class
The classroom should be a safe space to discuss any topic, no matter how controversial. We all have to build and maintain that safety by discussing respectfully, avoiding personal attacks, offensive epithets, contemptuous gestures and exclusive language. For example, avoid using masculine pronouns for the general case, as in “Everyone has a right to *his own property”. Appropriate language use includes neutral pronouns, e.g. her/his or their. Any student who feels uncomfortable in class is encouraged to get in contact with me.
Missed tests and discussions
Accommodation for a missed test will only be made under exceptional circumstances, such as a documented medical or family emergency. Discussion sessions cannot be repeated, therefore no alternative accommodations can be made for those who miss a discussion. Reasonable accommodation will be made for students to observe religious holidays when such observances require students to be absent from class activities. It is the responsibility of the student to inform the instructor, in writing, about such holidays during the first two weeks of the class each semester. If such holidays occur during the first two weeks of the semester, the student must notify the instructor, in writing, at least three days before the date that he/she will be absent. The Observance of Religious Holidays policy is available at http://senate.sfsu.edu/policy
If you miss a class
Please read this poem.
Gender-neutral writing
In philosophy, gender-neutral writing is the accepted practice recommended by the American Philosophical Association. See the APA guidelines here
Plagiarism
Plagiarizing someone else’s work is bad for many reasons (please see the report of the Office of Student Conduct). Amongst other things, it is a way of wasting the opportunity that taking a course represents to gain knowledge and understanding. Students who copy other students’ discussion questions and/or discussion reports will get a 0 for that assignment.
Disability Access Statement
Students with disabilities who need reasonable accommodations are encouraged to contact the instructor. The Disability Programs and Resource Center is available to facilitate the reasonable accommodations process. The DPRC, located in SSB 110, can be reached by telephone at 338-2472 (voice/TTY) or by e-mail at [email protected].
Learning Assistance Center
The Learning Assistance Center (LAC) provides free, on-campus writing tutoring for SF State students. It offers both one-time and ongoing tutoring sessions, with some same day appointments available. The LAC is open Monday through Friday from 9am-4pm and Friday from 9am-12pm. For more information and to schedule an appointment, go here.
Course outline
UNIT 1. What is risk?
Different notions of risk and uncertainty; fallacies of risk; what can philosophy teach us about risk?
UNIT 2. Assessing & Managing Risk
Is risk analysis value-free?; Cost-benefit analysis: what costs? Whose benefits?; Should risk assessment be separated from risk management?
UNIT 3. Risk Perception & The Role of Emotions
Decision Theory; emotions as guides and emotions as obstacles in risk perception; two modes of thinking about risk: analytic and experiential systems; risk perception, emotions and climate change
UNIT 4. The Precautionary Principle and Uncertainty in Science
What is the precautionary principle?; use and abuse of the precautionary principle in public policy and public discourses; charges against the precautionary principle; precaution vs. science: a fake dichotomy; case studies: X-rays, hydraulic fracturing, mobile phones, water scarcity; is uncertainty unscientific? How much certainty can science provide?
UNIT 5. Risk Communication
Health risk communication; case studies: mammography screening & breast cancer prevention; osteoporosis; Prostate-Specific Antigent (PSA) blood test & prostate cancer prevention; bad risk communication: whose responsibility?; risk & trust.
UNIT 6. Risk Exposure: Social Factors & Ethical Questions
Social conditions and health; how are discrimination and poverty related to risk?; case studies: premature birth, obesity, mental health; do we have a right not to be exposed to risks?; what is a fair distribution of risk?
UNIT 7. How can we make better decisions about risk?
Rules of thumb; fast gut-feelings vs. slow cognitive processes; should we always trust our gut-feelings?
Readings
All the readings except for Gigerenzer (2014) Risk Savvy will be available on the course website.
Unit 2:
Cranor, Carl F. 1997. The Normative Nature of Risk Assessment: Features and Possibilities.
Hansson, Sven O. 2004. Weighing Risks & Benefits.
Unit 3:
Roeser, Sabine. 2012. Moral Emotions as Guide to Acceptable Risk.
Slovic, Paul, Melissa Finucane, Ellen Peters, and Donald MacGregor. 2004. Risk as Analysis and Risk as Feelings: Some Thoughts about Affect, Reason, Risk, and Rationality.
Slovic, Paul. 2007. “If I Look at the Mass, I Will Never Act”: Psychic Numbing and Genocide.
Unit 4:
Chalmers, Alan F. 1999. What is This Thing Called Science (ch. 1, 2 & 4).
European Environment Agency (EEA). 2001. Late Lessons from Early Warnings, Volume I: The Precautionary Principle 1896-2000.
--------- 2013. Late Lessons from Early Warnings, Volume II: Science Precaution, and Innovation.
Finkel, Madelon L. and Adam Law. 2011. The Rush to Drill for Natural Gas: A Public Health Cautionary Tale.
Herbst, Mary. 2014. Another Voice: There is Clear Scientific Evidence of Fracking’s Harm.
Mitka, Mike. 2012. Rigorous Evidence Slim for Determining Health Risks from Natural Gas Fracking.
Solomon, Susan, Gian-Kasper Platter, Reto Knutti, and Pierre Friedlingstein. 2009. Irreversible Climate Change Due to Carbon Dioxide Emissions.
United Nations World Commission on the Ethics of Scientific Knowledge and Technology. 2005. The Precautionary Principle.
Unit 5:
Arkes Hal R. and Wolfgang Gaissmaier. 2012. Psychological Research and the Prostate-Cancer Screening Controversy.
Gigerenzer, Gerd. 2014a. Breast Cancer Screening Pamphlets Mislead Women.
Lombrozo, Tania. 2014. How Not To Teach Climate Change.
Unit 6:
Galea, Sandro, Melissa Tracy, Katherine Hoggatt, Charler DiMaggio, and Adam Karpati. 2011. Estimated Deaths Attributable to Social Factors in the United States.
Hayenhjelm, Madeleine. 2012. What is a Fair Distribution of Risk?
Krieger, Nancy. 2000. Discrimination and Health.
Unit 7:
Gigerenzer, Gerd. 2014b. Risk Savvy: How To Make Good Decisions..
Readings for group discussions
Discussion #1:
Luloff, A.E., Stan L. Albrecht & Lisa Bourke. 1998. NIMBY and The Hazardous and Toxic Waster Siting Dilemma: The Need for a Concept Clarification.
Tyson, Rae. 2012. The New Look of NIMBYism.
Discussion #2:
Roeser, Sabine. 2012. Risk Communication, Public Engagement, and Climate Change: A Role for Emotions.
Leiserowitz, Anthony A. 2005. American Risk Perceptions: Is Climate Change Dangerous?
Discussion #3:
Dimick, D. 2014. If You Think The Water Crisis Can’t Get Worse, Wait Until The Aquifers Are Drained.
Porter, E. 2014. The Risks of Cheap Water.
Romm, J. 2011. The Next Dust Bowl.
Shelton, K & McKenzie, R. 2014. The California Water Crisis: Policing vs. Pricing?
Discussion #4:
O’Neill, Saffron, and Sophie Nicholson-Cole. 2009. “Fear Won’t Do It” Promoting Positive Engagement With Climate Change Through Visual and Iconic Representations.
Discussion #5:
Krieger, Nancy. 2003. Does Racism Harm Health? Did Child Abuse Exist Before 1962? On Explicit Questions, Critical Science, and Current Controversies: An Ecosocial Perspective.
Williams, David R., and Selina A. Mohammed. 2013. Racism and Health I: Pathways and Scientific Evidence.
This course explores a broad range of questions surrounding the notion of risk. For example, what do we mean by risk? Is risk objective or subjective? When facing a potential risk, should we wait to have full scientific certainty before taking preventive measures? Do emotions help or hinder detection of risk? Do we have a right not to be exposed to risks? Are we all exposed to the same risks? How can we make better decisions about risk? What do we mean when we say that a certain group of people is at a higher risk of developing a disease? How do experts measure risks associated with new technologies? How is risk communicated to the public? Should experts and authorities nudge us to help us make better decisions about risks? How is discrimination related to risk and health? What can philosophy teach us about risk? We will apply the conceptual tools of philosophy to dissect these (and other) questions, and to examine examples of environmental and health risks.
Students learning outcomes
Students will learn basic concepts of risk analysis and develop a critical approach to environmental and health risks. Towards the end of the semester, students will be able to ask new and better questions about the risks we are exposed to.
Course requirements
Students are expected to attend all classes, read all the materials (which will be made available online), to participate in the required discussions and to make the most of the lectures by paying attention and taking notes.
Course evaluation
3 celebrations of learning: 65% total
12 pop quizzes: 10% total
1 discussion report: 15%
5 discussion questions: 10% total
Celebrations of Learning: There will be three in-class closed-book tests. Each will consist of a combination of multiple choice, fill-in-the-gap and short answer questions.
Celebration of Learning #1 & #2: 20% of final grade each.
Celebration of Learning #3: 25% of final grade.
Pop quizzes: There will be 12 short pop quizzes throughout the semester. They will be graded pass/fail, and they can happen on any day (including discussion sessions). Only 10 of these quizzes will count towards your grade, which means you can miss two of them without penalty. I won’t accept any excuses for missing more than two. Completing all 12 will not result in extra credit.
Discussion reports: Each student is required to write a short report (no longer than a page, one-sided) about one of the group discussions (there are 5 discussion sessions; only one report per student is required). These reports should reflect one or more of the questions (not all of them) discussed by the group. The reports are not expected to propose a solution to the problems that were addressed during the discussion. These reports are an opportunity to express your understanding of the topic.
An example of a poor report: a list of disconnected questions in a bullet-point format.
An example of a good report: a description of one question that was discussed, and a critical comment on that question (how it relates to materials discussed in class, how some of the solutions proposed during the discussion fail or succeed in addressing it).
You can maximize your chances to write a good report by taking notes during the discussion. Discussion reports must be submitted by 11:55 pm the day after the discussion; for example, if the discussion takes place on a Thursday, the deadline to submit discussion reports is Friday 11:55pm.
Discussion questions: These are questions about the discussion readings that students must bring to each discussion session. These questions might express doubts about the reading, critiques of the reading, or some thoughts about how that reading relates to the material we covered in class or to some personal experience. Discussion questions must be posted on iLearn (detailed instructions will be given in class) no later than 24 hours before each discussion, to allow time for the moderators to collect and process them (for example, if the discussion is on Tuesday at 2:10pm, the deadline is Monday 2:10pm). Each question is worth 2% of your final grade. They will be graded on a 0-1 scale (0: non-existent or irrelevant; 1: relevant).
Instructions for discussion sessions: There are two roles a student might take in discussions: participant or moderator. Each student must be a moderator in one of the discussion sessions, and a participant in the remaining four sessions.
Duties of participants: participants must bring, in a written format, one question about the reading assigned for the discussion. They must post their questions on iLearn 24 hours before the discussion session, and bring their questions to class the day of the discussion session.
Duties of moderators: moderators have 4 important tasks to fulfill. First, they are in charge of collecting all the discussion questions from their group members (which will be made available on iLearn 24 hours before the discussion session), and bring the list to class (printed or saved on a laptop/tablet). Second, moderators should not forget to submit their own discussion questions for the discussion session they are moderating. Third, moderators must make sure that everyone in their group takes their turn in the discussion. Finally, they must write a report about their group discussion, and submit it by 11:55pm the day after the discussion session.
The discussion sessions work as follows: The class will be randomly divided in groups. These groups will be the same for all the discussions. Each student must bring one question to the discussion (in some written format), moderators included. At the beginning of the session, each student will have one minute of uninterrupted time to pose their question. Make sure the student posing their question prior to yours has said “I’m finished” before starting to speak, and make sure you say “I’m finished” after posing your own question. After everyone has posed their question, open discussion starts.
Important: Sign up to be a moderator! You can do it on the course website on iLearn.
Students who want to be moderators for discussion session #1 should sign up by February 5 2015. Discussion reports for session #1 will receive extra credit. To be a moderator for one of the following discussion sessions (#2-#5), sign up by February 19 2015. Readings for discussion sessions will be posted online one week before each discussion.
Attendance and participation
Regular attendance is expected. Pop quizzes will be used to monitor and give credit for attendance.
Behavior in class
The classroom should be a safe space to discuss any topic, no matter how controversial. We all have to build and maintain that safety by discussing respectfully, avoiding personal attacks, offensive epithets, contemptuous gestures and exclusive language. For example, avoid using masculine pronouns for the general case, as in “Everyone has a right to *his own property”. Appropriate language use includes neutral pronouns, e.g. her/his or their. Any student who feels uncomfortable in class is encouraged to get in contact with me.
Missed tests and discussions
Accommodation for a missed test will only be made under exceptional circumstances, such as a documented medical or family emergency. Discussion sessions cannot be repeated, therefore no alternative accommodations can be made for those who miss a discussion. Reasonable accommodation will be made for students to observe religious holidays when such observances require students to be absent from class activities. It is the responsibility of the student to inform the instructor, in writing, about such holidays during the first two weeks of the class each semester. If such holidays occur during the first two weeks of the semester, the student must notify the instructor, in writing, at least three days before the date that he/she will be absent. The Observance of Religious Holidays policy is available at http://senate.sfsu.edu/policy
If you miss a class
Please read this poem.
Gender-neutral writing
In philosophy, gender-neutral writing is the accepted practice recommended by the American Philosophical Association. See the APA guidelines here
Plagiarism
Plagiarizing someone else’s work is bad for many reasons (please see the report of the Office of Student Conduct). Amongst other things, it is a way of wasting the opportunity that taking a course represents to gain knowledge and understanding. Students who copy other students’ discussion questions and/or discussion reports will get a 0 for that assignment.
Disability Access Statement
Students with disabilities who need reasonable accommodations are encouraged to contact the instructor. The Disability Programs and Resource Center is available to facilitate the reasonable accommodations process. The DPRC, located in SSB 110, can be reached by telephone at 338-2472 (voice/TTY) or by e-mail at [email protected].
Learning Assistance Center
The Learning Assistance Center (LAC) provides free, on-campus writing tutoring for SF State students. It offers both one-time and ongoing tutoring sessions, with some same day appointments available. The LAC is open Monday through Friday from 9am-4pm and Friday from 9am-12pm. For more information and to schedule an appointment, go here.
Course outline
UNIT 1. What is risk?
Different notions of risk and uncertainty; fallacies of risk; what can philosophy teach us about risk?
UNIT 2. Assessing & Managing Risk
Is risk analysis value-free?; Cost-benefit analysis: what costs? Whose benefits?; Should risk assessment be separated from risk management?
UNIT 3. Risk Perception & The Role of Emotions
Decision Theory; emotions as guides and emotions as obstacles in risk perception; two modes of thinking about risk: analytic and experiential systems; risk perception, emotions and climate change
UNIT 4. The Precautionary Principle and Uncertainty in Science
What is the precautionary principle?; use and abuse of the precautionary principle in public policy and public discourses; charges against the precautionary principle; precaution vs. science: a fake dichotomy; case studies: X-rays, hydraulic fracturing, mobile phones, water scarcity; is uncertainty unscientific? How much certainty can science provide?
UNIT 5. Risk Communication
Health risk communication; case studies: mammography screening & breast cancer prevention; osteoporosis; Prostate-Specific Antigent (PSA) blood test & prostate cancer prevention; bad risk communication: whose responsibility?; risk & trust.
UNIT 6. Risk Exposure: Social Factors & Ethical Questions
Social conditions and health; how are discrimination and poverty related to risk?; case studies: premature birth, obesity, mental health; do we have a right not to be exposed to risks?; what is a fair distribution of risk?
UNIT 7. How can we make better decisions about risk?
Rules of thumb; fast gut-feelings vs. slow cognitive processes; should we always trust our gut-feelings?
Readings
All the readings except for Gigerenzer (2014) Risk Savvy will be available on the course website.
Unit 2:
Cranor, Carl F. 1997. The Normative Nature of Risk Assessment: Features and Possibilities.
Hansson, Sven O. 2004. Weighing Risks & Benefits.
Unit 3:
Roeser, Sabine. 2012. Moral Emotions as Guide to Acceptable Risk.
Slovic, Paul, Melissa Finucane, Ellen Peters, and Donald MacGregor. 2004. Risk as Analysis and Risk as Feelings: Some Thoughts about Affect, Reason, Risk, and Rationality.
Slovic, Paul. 2007. “If I Look at the Mass, I Will Never Act”: Psychic Numbing and Genocide.
Unit 4:
Chalmers, Alan F. 1999. What is This Thing Called Science (ch. 1, 2 & 4).
European Environment Agency (EEA). 2001. Late Lessons from Early Warnings, Volume I: The Precautionary Principle 1896-2000.
--------- 2013. Late Lessons from Early Warnings, Volume II: Science Precaution, and Innovation.
Finkel, Madelon L. and Adam Law. 2011. The Rush to Drill for Natural Gas: A Public Health Cautionary Tale.
Herbst, Mary. 2014. Another Voice: There is Clear Scientific Evidence of Fracking’s Harm.
Mitka, Mike. 2012. Rigorous Evidence Slim for Determining Health Risks from Natural Gas Fracking.
Solomon, Susan, Gian-Kasper Platter, Reto Knutti, and Pierre Friedlingstein. 2009. Irreversible Climate Change Due to Carbon Dioxide Emissions.
United Nations World Commission on the Ethics of Scientific Knowledge and Technology. 2005. The Precautionary Principle.
Unit 5:
Arkes Hal R. and Wolfgang Gaissmaier. 2012. Psychological Research and the Prostate-Cancer Screening Controversy.
Gigerenzer, Gerd. 2014a. Breast Cancer Screening Pamphlets Mislead Women.
Lombrozo, Tania. 2014. How Not To Teach Climate Change.
Unit 6:
Galea, Sandro, Melissa Tracy, Katherine Hoggatt, Charler DiMaggio, and Adam Karpati. 2011. Estimated Deaths Attributable to Social Factors in the United States.
Hayenhjelm, Madeleine. 2012. What is a Fair Distribution of Risk?
Krieger, Nancy. 2000. Discrimination and Health.
Unit 7:
Gigerenzer, Gerd. 2014b. Risk Savvy: How To Make Good Decisions..
Readings for group discussions
Discussion #1:
Luloff, A.E., Stan L. Albrecht & Lisa Bourke. 1998. NIMBY and The Hazardous and Toxic Waster Siting Dilemma: The Need for a Concept Clarification.
Tyson, Rae. 2012. The New Look of NIMBYism.
Discussion #2:
Roeser, Sabine. 2012. Risk Communication, Public Engagement, and Climate Change: A Role for Emotions.
Leiserowitz, Anthony A. 2005. American Risk Perceptions: Is Climate Change Dangerous?
Discussion #3:
Dimick, D. 2014. If You Think The Water Crisis Can’t Get Worse, Wait Until The Aquifers Are Drained.
Porter, E. 2014. The Risks of Cheap Water.
Romm, J. 2011. The Next Dust Bowl.
Shelton, K & McKenzie, R. 2014. The California Water Crisis: Policing vs. Pricing?
Discussion #4:
O’Neill, Saffron, and Sophie Nicholson-Cole. 2009. “Fear Won’t Do It” Promoting Positive Engagement With Climate Change Through Visual and Iconic Representations.
Discussion #5:
Krieger, Nancy. 2003. Does Racism Harm Health? Did Child Abuse Exist Before 1962? On Explicit Questions, Critical Science, and Current Controversies: An Ecosocial Perspective.
Williams, David R., and Selina A. Mohammed. 2013. Racism and Health I: Pathways and Scientific Evidence.