Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Douglas Axe on science and public opinion

arroba Email

From Douglas Axe, author of Undeniable, in response to Atul Gawande (“Scientific explanation stands in contrast to the wisdom of divinity and experience and common sense”), who was complaining about lack of public confidence in science.

At Evolution News & Views:

Maybe the better way to restore public confidence is to abandon the condescending mindset and embrace a much more radically inclusive view of science. Maybe the moms Gawande referred to — the ones who jumped to the conclusion that vaccines were dangerous — aren’t all that different from professional scientists who jump to the conclusion that public dissent is dangerous. Gawande gave five handy tips for writing people off as pseudoscientists, but instead of alienating people by dismissing them in this way, what if we were to view public opinion as the ultimate form of peer review?

If the safety of well-studied vaccines and the danger of forgoing them are observable facts, perhaps we should trust public peer review to affirm this. Indeed, it already has. Gawande mentioned the tragic human cost of a drop in vaccination rates in the US from 1989 to 1991. Ten years after that drop, Gallop results showed that “parents with the most information, both positive and negative, are most likely to get their children vaccinated.” And this public verdict has held. According to a recent Pew Research Center report: “A vast majority of Americans view childhood vaccines as safe.”

People aren’t stupid. Science is a public enterprise, and public acceptance has always been its most significant seal of approval. Professional scientists should embrace this by doing more free sharing of information and less complaining about public opinion. More.

Of course. As a matter of fact, the public has recently been dealing with the discoveries that a lot of nutrition science is bunk (salt isn’t Bad, for example), whole foods are way overrated, and many promising cancer studies can’t be replicated.

It says something alarming about our culture that—at this point—when many scientists are having second thoughts about how things get classed as good science, the big worry should be that the public isn’t trusting enough.

Alternative suggestion: If you want to be believed, be believable.

Public opinion isn’t any kind of a gold standard. Rather, over time, involving more people with different life experiences in a free and honest discussion will usually produce better results than we get from small committees of elite authoritarian asshats. Try it, it works.

Keep up to date with Retraction Watch

See also: Atul Gawande on public opinion


Bill Nye as authoritarian asshat

Follow UD News at Twitter!

Is Gawande referring to america or his own people??? There is a difference and physician heal thyself. People are not stupid. Its not a accurate analysis of human intelligence. People just don't know things. Then what they know is based on this or that. Science is understood by the people to mean humans figuring things out. So they can be wrong and so science is not about accurate conclkusions. Indeed its a methodology to help people figure things out or not declare conclusions too quickly. People rightly don't see enough accomplishment for any one to complain about any wariness about science claims. Certainly the origin issues has dealt a severe body blow to confidence in conclusions from so called science at least in North america. Robert Byers
People aren't stupid? Given the right topic, we all have shown our ignorance and unreasonable logic from time to time. We are human after all. How else do you explain Trump? rhampton7

Leave a Reply