Science

3234 readers

5 users here now

General discussions about "science" itself

Be sure to also check out these other Fediverse science communities:

https://lemmy.ml/c/science

https://beehaw.org/c/science

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

144

Study finds American trust in scientific expertise survived polarization and previous administration's attack on science (phys.org)

submitted 8 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

22 comments fedilink hide all child comments

A new analysis shows that trust in scientific expertise among the American public remained high during the last six decades and that the Trump administration attacks on scientific expertise did not modify the basic confidence of Americans in science and scientific expertise.

The study, "Citizen attitudes toward science and technology, 1957–2020: Measurement, stability, and the Trump challenge," was published in the journal Science and Public Policy.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] -5 points 8 months ago (2 children)

I generally have a pretty high trust in science, but my faith is shaken when I come across shit like this

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

One person does something bad and you doubt the entire discipline?

Accept that perfect doesn't exist. Some people will make mistakes. Some will be outright evil. But science is the best method we have for understanding the world around us. Nobody has ever come up with a better way.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (2 children)

One person doing something bad? You clearly didn't read the article.

And to suggest that our scientific research institutions shouldn't be scrutinized or there isn't room to improve the process is a little naive.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

You think this suggests there should be no scrutiny?

Accept that perfect doesn't exist. Some people will make mistakes. Some will be outright evil. But science is the best method we have for understanding the world around us. Nobody has ever come up with a better way.

Understanding that there will be mistakes and bad actors means taking care to scrutinize. That's why we have things like peer review.

[–] sukhmel 1 points 8 months ago

And to suggest that our scientific research institutions shouldn't be scrutinized or there isn't room to improve the process is a little naive.

But ey didn't suggest that 🤔

[–] sukhmel 2 points 8 months ago

This was an amazing read, although that doesn't mean that science is somehow at fault in this. As usual, it's people and bureaucratic institutions that make this possible, but it's also people who find it out and call con-artists out