Those who know science are less likely to accept it if it’s controversial (2017)

Re:Those who know science are less likely to accept it if it... by briefcomment on Tuesday July 13, 2021 @01:36PM (#27823751)

I agree with your points, which is why I think people should almost never be sure of one side or another. Necessarily, they should have some self doubt, just because it would be impossible to do all of the above. The only stance I think is indefensible is to think that one side is definitely correct (outside of extremely well defined problems).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Those who know science are less likely to accept it if it... by vibrio on Tuesday July 13, 2021 @03:56PM (#27825531)

I guess I agree from an academic point of view where absolute truth is nearly hypothetical and overwhelming evidence is rare. From a logistical point of view, I guess its risk/benefit balanced by evidence. For instance, Wearing a mask, very likely helps reduce indoor SARS-COV-2 transmission. The cost or hassle to me is minimal. That is in that risk benefit balance, I found the evidence for mask to be overwhelming. And yes, Skepticism is always healthy and the core of scientific thinking.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Those who know science are less likely to accept it if it... by briefcomment on Tuesday July 13, 2021 @05:51PM (#27826720)

I would agree. To be pedantic, I still wouldn't say that the evidence for mask wearing was overwhelming, but rather, the cost benefit analysis clearly put mask wearing ahead, regardless of how clear the evidence was, just because the cost was so low.

[ Parent | on HN ]