Use of Social Scientific Information in Parliamentary Discussion

Abstract

The article examines how social scientific information is discursively utilized as an argumentative and rhetorical resource at debates held during plenary sessions at the Finnish parliament. The authors analyze the speeches given by members of parliament by using the methodological perspective of constructionist discourse analysis. It is found out that the objectivity and authority of social scientific information in parliamentary discussion can be undermined by using at least four types of arguments stressing (1) contradictions, (2) politicization of information, (3) uncertainty of information and (4) the inability of scientific knowledge to solve value conflicts. The speakers utilize social scientific information instrumentally to solve a certain social problem defined in advance, to provide statistical evidence, to show a causal relationship, or to justify an individual argument. However, social scientific information can also be used conceptually to bring larger perspectives to conversation or to reveal unnoticed aspects of the problem under discussion. Social scientific information often penetrates the symbolic definition struggles under way, and in this respect it alters social reality. In conclusions, the serious difficulties built into the professional position of librarians as providers of neutral facts are considered.

Citation

Tuominen, K. and Turja, T. (2007), "Use of Social Scientific Information in Parliamentary Discussion", Garten, E.D., Williams, D.E., Nyce, J.M. and Talja, S. (Ed.) Advances in Library Administration and Organization (Advances in Library Administration and Organization, Vol. 25), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Leeds, pp. 133-154. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0732-0671(07)25007-2