Ground-zero empiricism

At moments of extreme scientific uncertainty, observation, usually treated as the poor relation of experiment and statistics in science, comes into its own. Suggestive single cases, striking anomalies, partial patterns, correlations as yet too faint to withstand statistical scrutiny, what works and what doesn’t: every clinical sense, not just sight, sharpens in the search for clues. Eventually, some of those clues will guide experiment and statistics: what to test, what to count. The numbers will converge; causes will be revealed; uncertainty will sink to tolerable levels. But for now, we are back in the seventeenth century, the age of ground-zero empiricism, and observing as if our lives depended on it. — Lorraine Daston, “Ground-zero empiricism” (2021)

The state of radical uncertainty and lack of established knowledge that arises during events of extreme novelty or epistemic rupture. An effective regression to an earlier stage of scientific inquiry, guided by observation. Epistemic vertigo?

Pre-conditions:

• A radical break from normalcy and familiarity
• Lack of relevant prior data and established knowledge
• Urgent need to understand the phenomenon despite uncertainty
• Recourse to careful empirical observation as a starting point

Originally coined in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, but could apply in other circumstances, e.g. advent of nuclear technology, chance discovery of penicillin, “sexual revolution” of the 1960s, early colonial encounters, identification of HIV-AIDS, verifiable extraterrestrial signals.

(The declaration of “ground zero” has a performative and rhetorical function, framing a moment of radical novelty and mobilising/enabling certain repertoires of action.)

Key point: Moments of ground-zero empiricism render the provisional, processual nature of science dramatically visible to publics accustomed to science delivering authoritative truths.

• [?] Feminist philosophers of science like Sandra Harding and Donna Haraway have long argued a “view from nowhere” is impossible, and that all knowledge is partial and situated; how might their insights inform an understanding of “ground-zero empiricism” as an opportunity to recognise the contingency and provisionality of scientific knowledge?
• [⎈] In the arts, avant-garde movements often sought to break with established traditions and institutions; examining how these breaks have been theorised and enacted could provide useful points of comparison.
• [?] Is ground-zero empiricism a regression, or a necessary stage that recurs whenever radically new phenomena are encountered? Is it an aberration or simply part of the scientific process?
• [&] See also: abductive reasoning, conceptual emergency, postnormal science?

Tags: epistemics