Yeah. Medical and science denialism is a big problem. It gets fed when medicine and science are presented as absolutes with no room for debate or discussion, just blind fealty to experts. As a trained scientist who has worked professionally as a scientist for 12 years, I don’t trust several disciplines because they project this attitude. I don’t blame anyone for being skeptical of those who ask for blind trust in authority.
I’m a former scientist in the environmental field and we deal with similar denialism for similar reasons. As science and technology get more complex, the average person simply doesn’t have the background to understand the problem, let alone possible solutions. A certain amount of trust in authority is necessary unfortunately.
If you tell people to trust authorities about climate change instead of fostering critical thought and understanding, who is to say that their authorities will align with yours?
Your assertion is a recipe for pushing people to believe misinformation because they feel that they can trust their pastor or their employer or the guy on the news more than some nerd.
I get your point but there is a middle ground. You can apply critical thought to the selection of authorities you can trust. You wouldn’t trust an auto mechanic to tell you if your mole was cancerous even though you do trust them with your transmission, right? We need to teach people to recognize areas of expertise a person might have and reject opinions outside that area.
I’d still want the auto mechanic to tell me what’s wrong with the transmission and how they diagnosed it. It’s true that I’d expect them to know what tests to run for the diagnosis due to their experience/training, but I still want to know what they discovered and how in order to better understand what’s going on with the vehicle and whether they are giving me a fair price for the repair.
Yeah. Medical and science denialism is a big problem. It gets fed when medicine and science are presented as absolutes with no room for debate or discussion, just blind fealty to experts. As a trained scientist who has worked professionally as a scientist for 12 years, I don’t trust several disciplines because they project this attitude. I don’t blame anyone for being skeptical of those who ask for blind trust in authority.
I’m a former scientist in the environmental field and we deal with similar denialism for similar reasons. As science and technology get more complex, the average person simply doesn’t have the background to understand the problem, let alone possible solutions. A certain amount of trust in authority is necessary unfortunately.
I have to disagree.
If you tell people to trust authorities about climate change instead of fostering critical thought and understanding, who is to say that their authorities will align with yours?
Your assertion is a recipe for pushing people to believe misinformation because they feel that they can trust their pastor or their employer or the guy on the news more than some nerd.
I get your point but there is a middle ground. You can apply critical thought to the selection of authorities you can trust. You wouldn’t trust an auto mechanic to tell you if your mole was cancerous even though you do trust them with your transmission, right? We need to teach people to recognize areas of expertise a person might have and reject opinions outside that area.
I’d still want the auto mechanic to tell me what’s wrong with the transmission and how they diagnosed it. It’s true that I’d expect them to know what tests to run for the diagnosis due to their experience/training, but I still want to know what they discovered and how in order to better understand what’s going on with the vehicle and whether they are giving me a fair price for the repair.