• Journal of Science and Technology Studies
• /
• v.19 no.1
• /
• pp.1-51
• /
• 2019

The understanding of law and science as fundamentally different two systems, in which fact stands against justice, rapid progress against prudent process, is far too simple to be valid. Nonetheless, such account is commonly employed to explain the tension between law and science or justice and truth. Previous STS research raises fundamental doubts upon the off-the-shelf concept of "scientific truth" that can be introduced to the court for legal judgment. Delimiting the qualification of the expert, the value of the expert knowledge, or the criteria of the scientific expertise have always included social negotiation. What are the values that are affecting the boundary-making of the thing called "modern science" that is supposedly useful in solving legal conflicts? How do the value of law and the meaning of justice change as the boundaries of modern science take shapes? What is the significance of "science" when it is emphasized, particularly in relation to the legal provisions of paternity, and how does this perception of science affect unfoldings of legal disputes? In order to explore the answers to the above questions, we follow a process in which a type of "knowledge-deficient model" of a court-that is, law lags behind science and thus, under-employs its useful functions-can be closely examined. We attend to a series of discussions and subsequent changes that occurred in the US courts between 1930s and 1970s, when blood type tests began to be used to determine parental relations. In conclusion, we argue that it was neither nature nor truth in itself that was excavated by forensic scientists and legal practitioners, who regarded blood type tests as a truth machine. Rather, it was their careful practices and crafty narratives that made the roadmaps of modern science, technology, and society on which complex tensions between modern states, families, and courts were seen to be "resolved".

• Korean Chemical Engineering Research
• /
• v.57 no.5
• /
• pp.637-651
• /
• 2019

In the event of a major accident such as an explosion in a refinery or a petrochemical plant, it has caused a serious loss of life and property and has had a great impact on the insurance market. In the case of catastrophic incidents occurring in process industries such as refinery and petrochemical plants, only the proximate causes of loss have been drawn and studied from inspectors or claims adjustors responsible for claims of property insurers, incident cause investigators, and national forensic service workers. However, it has not been done well for conducting root cause analysis (RCA) and identifying the factors that contributed to the failure and establishing preventive measures before leading to chemical plant's catastrophic incidents. In this study, the criteria of warning signs on CCPS catastrophic incident waning sign self-assessment tool which was derived through the RCA method and the contribution factor analysis method using the swiss cheese model principle has been reviewed first. Secondly, in order to determine the major incident warning signs in an actual chemical plant, 614 recommendations which have been issued during last the 17 years by loss control engineers of global reinsurers were analyzed. Finally, in order to facilitate the assessment index for catastrophic incident warning signs, the criteria for the catastrophic incident warning sign index at chemical plants were grouped by type and classified into upper category and lower category. Then, a catastrophic incident warning sign index for a chemical plant was developed using the weighted values of each category derived by applying the analytic hierarchy process (pairwise comparison method) through a questionnaire answered by relevant experts of the chemical plant. It is expected that the final 'assessment index for catastrophic incident warning signs' can be utilized by the refinery and petrochemical plant's internal as well as external auditors to assess vulnerability levels related to incident warning signs, and identify the elements of incident warning signs that need to be tracked and managed to prevent the occurrence of serious incidents in the future.