5 ms·

Nobody should wonder why the public doesn't automatically trust scientists or "experts".

by bfieidhbrjr 6y ago

xsmasher 6y ago
Scientific consensus is the worst possible system for determining the truth, except for all of the others.
- goatlover 6y ago
  Similar to democracy and capitalism. Must be a human thing.
- hcrisp 6y ago
  Not direct revelation? Works okay between two people. Unless you do controlled blind study on everything you observe and hear.
  - mgkimsal 6y ago
    The only truth I think you could confirm is that you believe you got information X from person Y. You couldn't have a high degree of confidence that X is 'true' in any meaningful sense just from the revelation.
    - hcrisp 6y ago
      According to your view, I can't have confidence that your statement is "true" in any meaningful sense. But in my view, I can (though I don't, because it's "false").
UweSchmidt 6y ago
If the data was inconclusive and other promising theories existed, if scientists had a healthy discourse without politization and an us-vs-them mentality, if science was done ethical and rigorous, then I see no reason for the public to distrust scientists just because not everyone did agree on the theory we know is right in hindsight.
shmageggy 6y ago
The vast majority of distrust of science and experts has nothing to do with epistemology or history of science or anything else rational. It's because accepting scientific facts often leads to politically uncomfortable conclusions, like we can't keep pillaging the planet, or that trans people should be treated like humans.
jacquesm 6y ago
The public should trust scientists and experts as long as they (1) know more than they do about some subject and (2) have achieved a rough consensus. Because for most practical applications that will be more than good enough. The few cases where it isn't typically will not move the needle for the general public. The reason why people will not trust scientists (or journalists for that matter) is because other people, who are also not scientists (or journalists) want to manipulate them into acting against their own self interest. See also: lobbying, the tobacco industry and many other examples besides.

Nobody should wonder why the public doesn't automatically trust scientists or "experts".

xsmasher 6y ago

Scientific consensus is the worst possible system for determining the truth, except for all of the others.

goatlover 6y ago
Similar to democracy and capitalism. Must be a human thing.
hcrisp 6y ago
Not direct revelation? Works okay between two people. Unless you do controlled blind study on everything you observe and hear.
- mgkimsal 6y ago
  The only truth I think you could confirm is that you believe you got information X from person Y. You couldn't have a high degree of confidence that X is 'true' in any meaningful sense just from the revelation.
  - hcrisp 6y ago
    According to your view, I can't have confidence that your statement is "true" in any meaningful sense. But in my view, I can (though I don't, because it's "false").

UweSchmidt 6y ago

If the data was inconclusive and other promising theories existed, if scientists had a healthy discourse without politization and an us-vs-them mentality, if science was done ethical and rigorous, then I see no reason for the public to distrust scientists just because not everyone did agree on the theory we know is right in hindsight.

shmageggy 6y ago

The vast majority of distrust of science and experts has nothing to do with epistemology or history of science or anything else rational. It's because accepting scientific facts often leads to politically uncomfortable conclusions, like we can't keep pillaging the planet, or that trans people should be treated like humans.

jacquesm 6y ago

The public should trust scientists and experts as long as they (1) know more than they do about some subject and (2) have achieved a rough consensus. Because for most practical applications that will be more than good enough. The few cases where it isn't typically will not move the needle for the general public. The reason why people will not trust scientists (or journalists for that matter) is because other people, who are also not scientists (or journalists) want to manipulate them into acting against their own self interest. See also: lobbying, the tobacco industry and many other examples besides.