Yet the foreword also deserves scrutiny.
By emphasizing vindication, it risks flattening the historical complexity of the debate. Some early criticisms of Carson were made in good faith, reflecting genuine scientific uncertainty rather than corporate malice.
There is also the danger of canonisation. When a text is framed as prophetic, it can become immune to critique. Carson herself resisted this posture.
Moreover, the foreword may encourage retrospective moral clarity. Decisions that now appear reckless were often made under incomplete knowledge — a point Carson herself acknowledged.
Nevertheless, these tensions do not weaken the foreword’s value. They underscore its purpose: not to sanctify Carson, but to defend the legitimacy of asking inconvenient questions.
No comments:
Post a Comment