Jefferson, Anneli ![]() |
![]() |
PDF
- Accepted Post-Print Version
Download (306kB) |
Abstract
What should rational agents who want to act morally do during a pandemic: think for themselves or follow expert advice? In threatening situations characterized by uncertainty and significant risks to themselves and others, agents have epistemic and psychological needs that influence their decisions and are vulnerable to biases affecting their estimation of risk. This chapter considers the need for certainty and the optimism bias among other relevant factors. The presence of these influences on decision making suggests that in a crisis, such as a pandemic, agents are not in the best position to make decisions without relying on expert advice and support. However, in situations such as the initial stages of the pandemic, political and scientific authorities disagree on the best course of action and their recommendations conflict. Moreover, political leaders and scientific experts facing an uncertain threat are not immune themselves from epistemic and psychological biases. This chapter argues that citizens should not bear the sole responsibility of making complex decisions and estimating risks, and should be able to access sources that are marked as epistemically credible. For this to happen, institutions such as governments and scientific communities need to put in place structural measures to avoid and counteract biased decision making
Item Type: | Book Section |
---|---|
Date Type: | Publication |
Status: | Published |
Schools: | English, Communication and Philosophy |
Publisher: | Routledge |
ISBN: | 9781032315201 |
Date of First Compliant Deposit: | 23 February 2023 |
Last Modified: | 16 Dec 2024 02:30 |
URI: | https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/157276 |
Actions (repository staff only)
![]() |
Edit Item |