In this occasion I would like to talk about
Business Uncertainty and a model of knowledge and uncertainty called the Igloo
of Uncertainty obtained from the articles: Humankind and the
Environment: an anatomy of surprise and ignorance, from Faber M., et al;
and The Ethics of Uncertainty from EMBO reports.
Referring to the authors Christof Tannert,
Horst-Dietrich Elvers and Burkjard Jandrig (2007); Uncertainty touches most
aspects of life, especially when we make decisions that have consequences we
cannot predict.
"Let’s say we get out from home without an umbrella. That action carries a risk because it could start to rain. The same happens in business environments like investing in stock markets, which main risk is the loss of money."
A strategy to deal with these challenges is to
diminish uncertainty by acquiring knowledge of the issue.
I would like to quote a popular phrase said by the
United States Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld in 2002:
“There are known knowns; there are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns; that is to say, there are things that we now know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns – there are things we do not know we don't know.”
(Rumsfeld, 2002)
That is, the escence of what it is called
"uncertainty".
To explain how some important issues like ethics
are relevant to uncertainty, it is possible to draw a map of different forms of
uncertainty, beginning with a distinction between knowledge and ignorance of
the probabilities of adverse impacts (Tannert, et al, 2007).
It is important to distinguish between dangers and
risks. A danger has a prescribed quality and a defined probability, and can
therefore be avoided or counter-acted.
"Let’s say for example, car accidents that caused severe or deadly injuries prompted regulation for the mandatory installation and use of safety belts."
(Tannert, et al,
2007)
On the other hand, according to the authors, a risk
can either be accepted by, or imposed on, a person.
"Driving without a safety belt is a self-accepted risk, while selling cars with faulty safety belts imposes a risk on unsuspecting buyers."
(Tannert, et al., 2007)
That’s the main difference between risk and danger.
While the first one is accepted or imposed, the other one is always present
regardless of choice or decision.
When we know that a certain situation or decision will involve dangers and risks, it is a proactive and morally justifiable activity to reduce gaps in our knowledge.
(Tannert, et al., 2007)
According to the authors (2007), if the cause of ignorance
is a lack of knowledge, which cannot be reduced owing to stochastic and the
randomness of the matter under study, and/or the structure of our cognitive
apparatus, it is called closed ignorance or “nescience”, an absence of
knowledge.
Closed ignorance also
results from rejecting or ignoring available knowledge, which can be referred
as the “Galileo Effect”, which was inspired by the cardinal in Bertolt Brecht’s
play Galileo Galilei, who refused to look through a telescope in
order not to accept the knowledge that the planets revolve around the
sun (Tannert, et al., 2007). Closed Ignorance can be converted into open
ignorance with a change of attitude. It can be addressed by learning or by research
(Tannert, et al., 2007).
The term Closed Knowledge is defined by
comprehensive knowledge or the certainty that any event will happen in any
case.
"For example, driving at 200 Km/h without a safety belt generally means death in an accident. Under these circumstances, the most responsible and rational behavior would be either to use a safety belt or to avoid the situation."
On the other hand, Open Knowledge is defined by the
fact that there is enough information available to perform an assessment on the
situation, and because of that, it is possible to give a rational and
responsible advice (Tannert, et al., 2007).
In their study (2007), two types of
uncertainty are defined: The first form of uncertainty is objective
uncertainty, which can be further divided into epistemological uncertainty and
ontological uncertainty. The second main form of uncertainty is subjective
uncertainty, which is characterized by an inability to apply appropriate moral
rules. There are two sub-forms of subjective uncertainty. The first one with
respect to rule-guided decisions and the second is with respect to
intuition-guided decisions, that is, uncertainty in moral rules. (Tannert et
al., 2007)
The authors give the statement that Uncertainties challenge the
central claim of science: that all problems are presumed to be solvable by
research. However, many social and ethical issues have been
shown to be so complex that it might never be possible to make reliable
predictions about the effects of manipulating these systems.
This perspective is intended
to highlight some important considerations about the limitations of
knowledge in the assessment of risks (Tannert, et al., 2007). Clearly, acting in a state
of uncertainty can create ethical problems: ignorance caused by rejection of
knowledge can lead to danger. However, knowledge can also lead to ethical
problems: it can create risks if the exposed person decides to accept the threat,
imposes it on another person or accepts that such a threat is imposed.
I would like to conclude my main points by
stating that as I just had explained, uncertainties about adverse effects can
be categorized in taxonomy of uncertainty. While in the extreme of cases, the
solutions can be made through knowledge or an intuition guided decision.
Sources:
- Faber M; Manstetten R; Proops JLR (1992) Humankind and the Environment: an anatomy of surprise and ignorance. Environ Values. 1: 217-242.
- Tannert, Christof; Elvers, Horst-Dietrich; Jandrig, Burkhard. (2007) The ethics of Uncertainty. European Molecular Biology Organization. 8 (10): 892-896.
Cheers!
Jonathan
No comments:
Post a Comment