The truth and the lie
Stefano Guzzini was the invited keynote speaker at the 4th Congress of the Polish Political Science Association which took place at the Marie Curie-Skłodowskiej University, Lublin which took place from 18-20 September 2018. On the opening day, his talk reflected on expertise in political science in times of 'post-truth' and alternative facts and its link with discussions about 'illiberal democracies'. Entitled 'The truth and the lie', his speech made two points.
First, despite much heated debate and taking Karl Popper and constructivists as witnesses, most positivist and post-positivist positions in the philosophy of science share a series of important positions when it comes to the idea of knowledge and truth. Our knowledge is driven by the questions we ask and theories we built, but its tenets are checked by the response provided by the social world. Hence, truth is established among observers, but not independently from a social world which provides feedback, which, in turn, is interpreted. This provides an external check for an internal construction of the world of experts. Not 'anything goes', but in the feedback that provides objectivity, more than one potentially true story can survive. There is no 'post-truth', if by this we mean the impossibility to make non-subjective assessments about the social world. There are no alternative facts, if by this we mean explanations which the reply by the social world excludes.
Second, the origins of present-day relativism lies not with the academic discussions about truth, but in political programs to delegitimate existing knowledge and experty systems. This can happen in curbing the autonomy of research (funding, etc.) and media. It also happens by politicising research, in particular when confusing objectivity as impartality with objectivity as neutrality. A judge is impartial, yet the trial will find someone guilty and hence it is not neutral. Saying that Stalin was a dictator is not neutral, but an impartial statement given our present understandings. This confusion between impartiality and neutrality systematically undermines any possibility of a common space, of a public sphere in which rational discussion can assess the truth(s) and the lies, in which compromises can be found. Aiming at impartiality is conducive to truth, aiming at neutrality undermines the search for truth. Since no result is neutral, all results are politicised. With the democratic public sphere erased, all statements become mere expression of the relative political position.
In short, it is not epistemic relativism which produces political relativism; it is a political project of relativism which produces epistemic relativism. Democracy is the victim.
During the conference, the Polish translations of Guzzini's book on 'Realism in International Relations' was featured in the publishers' section.