Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Science and scientific expertise are more important than ever

scientificamerican.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 211 posts

Re: Science and scientific expertise are more important than ever

#111

Post by AlexTWithBeard »

tensor wrote: post #99
AlexTWithBeard wrote: post #68

Science is important. Science is great. I love science. Let's just be extremely careful when trying to apply the latest scientific achievements in our day to day lives. Phlogiston theory of 17th century was wrong. Race theory of 18th century was wrong. Semmelweis was laughed at in 19th century. And lobotomies were perfectly scientific for treating depressed patients for most of 20th century. I doubt 21st century's sc…

Those were found to be wrong because of the scientific process . It self corrects. In contrast, how many non-scientific "theories" have been right? How do you correct something that is wrong without a method like science? I could list any number of things like witchcraft, homeopathy, various snake oils, superstition causing animal abuse, as examples of what happens without science. Some of these things endure centuri…

Quite a few of non-scientific theories turned out to be right. Starting from the biblical "don't breed with your sister" to multiple herbs, which only recently were found to contain pretty scientific active ingredients.

Re: Science and scientific expertise are more important than ever

#112

Post by watwut »

cuspy wrote: post #55

Given the track record of institutional science and the ever-growing list of regulatory failures, moral failures and outright abuses pushed in the guise of scientific expertise, why do so many people seem to think that simply doubling down and bullying the general population into compliance with expert consensus will ever work? What if institutional science in the US has a legitimacy crisis because it has failed to p…

> I'd rather be ruled over by elite families than squabbling, territorial, overconfident scientists who can be bought off for nothing and blackmailed easily.

You did not read much history, did you?

Re: Science and scientific expertise are more important than ever

#113

Post by cuspy »

baddox wrote: post #91
cuspy wrote: post #55

Given the track record of institutional science and the ever-growing list of regulatory failures, moral failures and outright abuses pushed in the guise of scientific expertise, why do so many people seem to think that simply doubling down and bullying the general population into compliance with expert consensus will ever work? What if institutional science in the US has a legitimacy crisis because it has failed to p…

> Personally, as a scientist, I am comforted that there are enough others out there who doubt the entire notion of a scientific establishment that the population should "trust" to make decisions without oversight. I'm not sure what you're actually proposing, but it sounds dangerously close to "pilots have been in control of airplanes for decades, and they've caused so many crashes, so maybe it's time to try people wh…

I'm not proposing anything like that. I said that I'm glad others are becoming more skeptical of the message of relying on trust without oversight. The fact that you read my comment as advocating a total disregard for training and expertise is exactly why we are in this mess. Where is nuance?

No, I look at the current situation and conclude that our institutions are failing us. Notice that I didn't say I'd prefer to be ruled over by elite families rather than a consistent, transparent and democratic government that is accountable for its mistakes. I want government that has a generational stake in the outcome of its policies.

All I can say in response to you is that without charitable reading of one another's thoughts, we are never going to get anywhere. It will be endless, pointless dispute. Just because something "sounds like" something else in some superficial way, doesn't mean it is.

Re: Science and scientific expertise are more important than ever

#114

Post by AlexTWithBeard »

Consultant32452 wrote: post #87
AlexTWithBeard wrote: post #68

Science is important. Science is great. I love science. Let's just be extremely careful when trying to apply the latest scientific achievements in our day to day lives. Phlogiston theory of 17th century was wrong. Race theory of 18th century was wrong. Semmelweis was laughed at in 19th century. And lobotomies were perfectly scientific for treating depressed patients for most of 20th century. I doubt 21st century's sc…

One interesting thing to try to find is... during approximately what decade did "modern medicine" become a net benefit to health and longevity? The most common answers I've seen vary from the 1950s to we're not even 100% sure it's a net benefit now.

I think life expectancy started climbing up from 1850s, but it's hard to say which part of that is "medicine" and which is better nutrition and hygiene.

Re: Science and scientific expertise are more important than ever

#115

Post by giardini »

manux wrote: post #59
cuspy wrote: post #55

Given the track record of institutional science and the ever-growing list of regulatory failures, moral failures and outright abuses pushed in the guise of scientific expertise, why do so many people seem to think that simply doubling down and bullying the general population into compliance with expert consensus will ever work? What if institutional science in the US has a legitimacy crisis because it has failed to p…

> scientists who can be bought off for nothing and blackmailed easily. Bought off by who? I presume the "elite families" you mention. So either way we are ruled by the wealthy in this model. There are other options of course and I assume you would agree, I just wanted to point out my surprise at this false dichotomy (that's not even a dichotomy since they're mostly the same scenario). I also agree 100% that STEM prof…

manux asks> "Bought off by who?"

Big pharmaceutical companies that stand to make trillions of dollars. Don't be stupid, follow the money.

Re: Science and scientific expertise are more important than ever

#116

Post by UncleOxidant »

cuspy wrote: post #55

Given the track record of institutional science and the ever-growing list of regulatory failures, moral failures and outright abuses pushed in the guise of scientific expertise, why do so many people seem to think that simply doubling down and bullying the general population into compliance with expert consensus will ever work? What if institutional science in the US has a legitimacy crisis because it has failed to p…

Is there anything new here, though? Science is and always has been a human endeavor - it didn't arrive out of the sky delivered to us by gods or aliens. There have always been "regulatory failures (since we've had regulations, anyway), moral failures and outright abuses pushed in the guise of scientific expertise." this is nothing new.

Re: Science and scientific expertise are more important than ever

#117

Post by azinman2 »

0d9eooo wrote: post #19
octaveguin wrote: post #5

Politicizing science will make science less scientific and more political. It will not work the other way.

It's already too political. I agree with you; just saying that everything bad in that regard will get even worse.

Anything becomes political as soon as a second person gets added.

Re: Science and scientific expertise are more important than ever

#118

Post by JadeNB »

jfengel wrote: post #49
LordFast wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh, never thought about the math like that. It makes a lot of sense, thanks for sharing. P.S. Before the age of social media, was there not the same level of risk of induced ignorance through traditional media campaigns and propaganda? If not, why not?

Propaganda has always been a problem, and it's hard to quantify if it's actually worse now or merely different. Even if it's merely different, though, it feels like it's the kind of problem that should be solvable. In so many cases people aren't merely misinformed but actively hostile to science in a way that should bite them in the butt sooner rather than later. Surely, one thinks, that should make it possible to re…

> Propaganda has always been a problem, and it's hard to quantify if it's actually worse now or merely different.

I think that part of what makes it both different and worse now is the way that, thanks to automatic personalisation of content, what feels like honest intellectual inquiry will be met with automated replies that drive us deeper in the direction of our beliefs (inadvertently; they optimise for engagement, but it's more likely that a random browser will engage with something that supports their beliefs than that challenges them).

Of course, there was always propaganda before, but there was at least the chance of realising critically that it was being forced upon you, and so choosing to resist it; or, if you wanted to be swallowed up by the propaganda, at least you had to make some effort to find the material that would support that position. It's the way that our filter bubbles are now more than ever hidden from us and, even worse, presented as ever more rarefied intellectual inquiry that I think causes so much 'unswayability'.

Re: Science and scientific expertise are more important than ever

#119

Post by azinman2 »

AlexTWithBeard wrote: post #114
Consultant32452 wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One interesting thing to try to find is... during approximately what decade did "modern medicine" become a net benefit to health and longevity? The most common answers I've seen vary from the 1950s to we're not even 100% sure it's a net benefit now.

I think life expectancy started climbing up from 1850s, but it's hard to say which part of that is "medicine" and which is better nutrition and hygiene.

Antibiotics were a major factor, along with vaccines and clean water.

Re: Science and scientific expertise are more important than ever

#120

Post by JadeNB »

nostromo wrote: post #42
jfengel wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I provided a link. You don't get to sea-lion me by just repeating "evidence" until you've demonstrated that you've at least read the sources I gave you already.

The wikipedia article you linked doesn't make this claim. The primary example, that cigarette companies tried to hide that smoking causes cancer, doesn't prove this point -- the vast majority of people know this and the propaganda effort was a failure.

> the vast majority of people know this and the propaganda effort was a failure.

The vast majority of people know this now, but it was just as much a subject of motivated doubt in its time as climate change is now. It's only because of a massive counter-propaganda effort (in a good cause, but it's still propaganda) that it seems so obvious to us now, and so inevitable in retrospect that people of sense would see the truth.

Post reply on HN