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

The rise and fall of scientific authority, and how to bring it back

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 402 posts

Re: The rise and fall of scientific authority, and how to bring it back

#331

Post by solipsism »

icelancer wrote: post #315
Barrin92 wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>in this house, we believe science is real Or maybe those people, even if they don't have much of a grasp on the scientific method, see the material progress and results of scientific work and conclude that they're going to place trust in scientific authority? This is an entirely false equivalence. One can trust scientists even without understanding science, on the fact alone that research produces results that every…

> trust in scientific authority The very nature of science means that there should be no such thing as "scientific authority." (I say this as a person with published papers.)

Just goes to show you you can have "published papers" and be wrong. Nothing about science precludes the existence of authorities.

Re: The rise and fall of scientific authority, and how to bring it back

#332

Post by nec4b »

People by large still believe in the scientific process, they just don't trust the people who claim practicing science. To an outsider it seems that these days that universities mostly concern themselves with activism and feelings and less so with facts and logic. In their claim of intellectual superiority they come off very unintellectual and people notice it.

Re: The rise and fall of scientific authority, and how to bring it back

#333

Post by nitrogen »

cat199 wrote: post #279
joe_the_user wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would say that an even larger problem exists. Among the public, science has always had some portion of people who understood it's processes as those of a secular priesthood and those who understood it's processes as discovering the truth through skepticism and experimentation. Even among this working scientists, this division has existed (and given a society that never discarded religion, anti-science along with an…

show me the science that says that religion is against science and intellect. many of those responsible for science as a discipline throughout the centuries sought to know more of their creator rather than to debunk religion

See the book Faith vs Fact by Jerry Coyne for an exploration of the topic

Re: The rise and fall of scientific authority, and how to bring it back

#334

Post by solipsism »

charliesharding wrote: post #5

The way in which public considers science today is much more analogous to the way the public considered religion during the time of Galileo. Think of the way people are castigated for not believing in scientific "truths". I see signs in peoples yard saying that "in this house, we believe science is real". As someone who has studied biochemistry for years, this kind of reverence for science is truly troubling. The one…

You know you're on shaky ground when you take the most absurd interpretation of something and then argue against it.

"We believe science is real" is such a modest, uncontroversial statement. The idea that you'd see it and rail against some imagined dogmatic strawman really says more about you than it does about them.

Re: The rise and fall of scientific authority, and how to bring it back

#335

Post by justanotherjoe »

charliesharding wrote: post #5

The way in which public considers science today is much more analogous to the way the public considered religion during the time of Galileo. Think of the way people are castigated for not believing in scientific "truths". I see signs in peoples yard saying that "in this house, we believe science is real". As someone who has studied biochemistry for years, this kind of reverence for science is truly troubling. The one…

> The one thing you learn in high level science is that nobody really knows what they're talking about, paradigms shift, and further study is required

When you wrote that, what were you thinking of, specifically? I don't know what you are referencing. Also I'm curious, are there any big mysteries left in the field of biochemistry?

Re: The rise and fall of scientific authority, and how to bring it back

#336

Post by xorand »

The notion of "scientific authority" is contradictory with the scientific method. The scientific method is to independently validate an idea, theory, experiment.

The scientific authority is that belief instilled to the public that there is an advantage, or a reason for doing things in a way backed by science, as opposed as doing things backed by authority.

Re: The rise and fall of scientific authority, and how to bring it back

#337

Post by xkcd-sucks »

balabaster wrote: post #124
charliesharding wrote: post #5

The way in which public considers science today is much more analogous to the way the public considered religion during the time of Galileo. Think of the way people are castigated for not believing in scientific "truths". I see signs in peoples yard saying that "in this house, we believe science is real". As someone who has studied biochemistry for years, this kind of reverence for science is truly troubling. The one…

I believe this is a public perception problem. The reason that a troubling number of people no longer believe in science isn't that scientific method is flawed or that people don't believe in scientific method. The bigger concern is the way that scientific studies are mounted, paid for by interested parties that have conflicts of interest to produce results favourable to a desired outcome and then they're presented a…

All of this is correct. From teaching science at the collegiate level, it also seems like a shockingly large proportion of students want to be told the truth by an authority (not necessarily because they're "intellectually lazy"), and are not so good at looking at the world with their own eyes.

Re: The rise and fall of scientific authority, and how to bring it back

#338

Post by Smithalicious »

Science by nature is constantly changing and discovering the ways in which it was wrong before, so the idea of "scientific authority" was always more or less imaginary. Furthermore, what gets presented to the public as "science" is increasingly a series of clickbaity tall tales and biased studies.

Scientific authority is dying because it's not in people's interest to take scientists as an "authority". That's not to say that the cynicism that's replacing it is better, though.

Re: The rise and fall of scientific authority, and how to bring it back

#339

Post by sideshowb »

jimbokun wrote: post #264
sideshowb wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of your points 1,2,3 highlight a loss of authority so much as its transfer between different institutions: religion, state, teacher, parent. Ok, maybe transferring authority to individuals as in (1) could be counted as a loss, but in a topic so personal that it would be ridiculous for somebody to claim authority over others in it anyway.

"religion, state, teacher, parent" Nope, all of these are in simultaneous rapid decline in esteem and status.

Maybe but example 2 above was a case of state increasing in authority, and 3 might be for an I know but the post doesn't make it clear.

Re: The rise and fall of scientific authority, and how to bring it back

#340

Post by savingthrow »

MockObject wrote: post #7
savingthrow wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 2. a parent spanks their child because their child misbehaved, and the parent is then investigated by the authorities They should be investigated if their parenting is so poor that they resort to physical violence against the child. It's absurd to suggest that hitting children is acceptable - as absurd as saying a boss can slap an employee, or that a husband can slap his spouse. You can be an authoritative parent w…

The author's (or your, or my) personal opinion on spanking is very much not the issue here.

Sure, but parent poster mentioned violence against the child and I'm always always going to say that it's wrong.
Post reply on HN