Search results
Dec 13, 2023 · Scientists need to form bonds of trust with their fellow citizens. Thus, she convincingly proposes to embrace the values involved in science. These values, such as wanting to cure diseases, helping the economy with creativity, or protecting the natural world, are widely shared. Sharing such values appeals to the public and should increase their ...
1 day ago · Last week, the Pew Research Center released a report on public trust in scientists–overall and, specifically, their roles in policymaking. Pew surveyed 9,593 U.S. adults and found that about three-quarters (76%) said they have either “a great deal” or “a fair amount” (51%) of confidence in scientist
Oct 22, 2019 · Just back from sabbatical Naomi Oreskes has published “Why Trust Science?,” a timely book that examines the value of the scientific process of proof and verifiable facts in an era when both are under fire. Though the geologist-turned-history-of-science professor’s field is climate, she turned a critical eye to research ranging from sunscreen to birth control.
- Harvardgazette
Scientists must be free to learn, to speak and to challenge. Many of the world's biggest problems require asking questions of scientists -- but why should we believe what they say? Historian of science Naomi Oreskes thinks deeply about our relationship to belief and draws out three problems with common attitudes toward scientific inquiry -- and ...
- Common Arguments
- Popper and The Scientific Method
- Majority Rules
- The Bottom Line
One thought that might initially spring to mind is we ought to trust scientists because what they say is true. But there are problems with this. One is the question of whether what a scientist says is, in fact, the truth. Sceptics will point out scientists are just humans and remain prone to making mistakes. Also, if we look at the history of scien...
One influential answer to the question of why we should trust scientists is because they use the scientific method. This, of course, raises the question: what is the scientific method? Possibly the best-known account is offered by science philosopher Karl Popper, who has influenced an Einstein Medal-winning mathematical physicist and Nobel Prize wi...
Recently, an answer to the question was further articulated in a bookby science historian Naomi Oreskes. Oreskes acknowledges the importance Popper placed on the role of attempting to refute a theory, but also emphasises the social and consensual element of scientific practice. For Oreskes, we have reason to trust science because, or to the extent ...
This does not necessarily mean we ought to uncritically accept everything scientists say. There is of course a difference between a single isolated scientist or small group saying something, and there being a consensus within the scientific community that something is true. And, of course, for a variety of reasons – some practical, some financial, ...
Jul 11, 2022 · Thus, when we talk about public responses to science and technology, we tend to think of ‘science and technology’ in this latter way, namely as a symbolic category consisting of imagined agents such as ‘scientists,’ ‘technology companies,’ ‘genetics,’ and ‘computers,’ as well as the attributions that might be associated with these terms.
People also ask
Why should we trust science?
Should science be trusted?
Should we trust scientific research?
Do scientists really trust what they say?
Should publics trust scientists?
Should trust in science be a norm?
Abstract. To enjoy the public's trust, the research community must first be clear about what it is expected to do and then avoid the incidents that prevent it from meeting those expectations. Among other things, there are expectations that published scientific results will be reliable, that research has the potential to contribute to the common ...
