Re:How trust undermines science
by fuzzfactor on Sunday January 23, 2022 @06:19AM
(#30045350)
Trust, but verify.
> they should understand that trust is a BIG timesaver
As well as a BIG risk!
In any decent society, not really. This risk can be greatly mitigated by regulations, occasional independent review and transparency.
For example, I can rely that I won't get food poisoning in a restaurant. This is because we have rules of how to handle food (designed by expert consensus), and the restaurants are inspected from time to time if they follow these practices.
Scientists' job is to verify as much as possible (not to take the shortcut). Laymen can take the shortcut and trust the scientists.
If a layman wants not to trust the scientists, which is OK, then they should understand that trust is a BIG timesaver, and they have to put lot of effort into educating themselves about WHY scientists say what they say.
Too often, we see laymen questioning the scientific conclusions without putting up the work needed to educate themselves (at the very least, understanding the theories they disagree with). This has worse outcomes than lack of due diligence among scientists.
(And that's why argument from authority is a fallacy among scientists, but is not wrong to apply among general public, where it is a useful heuristic based on trust.)