Scientific Infantilism Watch

A.N. Wilson, the arch-conservative English litterateur, doesn't like scientists. They are ``gods of certainty'' and people who respect them, he writes today, are responsible for killing most of Britain's cows and sheep and keeping the country's addicts on their drugs and many other bad, bad things, yea, even unto Adolf: ``The only difference between Hitler and previous governments was that he believed, with babyish credulity, in science as the only truth. He allowed scientists freedoms which a civilized government would have checked.''


And so on and on. It is, in the words of a great American satirist, to laugh. (Not least because Wilson's picture of Nazi attitudes to science is exactly backwards.) But his yowl of Tory cretinism is worth noting. It's an illustration of the dangers of scientific infantilism: The belief that science is, or is supposed to be, or claims to be, a collection of absolute truths.

That idea isn't just for people who are anti-science, like Wilson. It's also upheld by some of science's advocates as a strategy for dealing with the public. Richard Dawkins, for example, apparently doesn't think people smart enough to learn that a theory can be robust, dependable and sound. Like it or not, many hear ``theory'' and think ``idle guess.'' So, Dawkins said last month, scientists would be better off condescending to the public: ``Because the word ‘theory’ is so wantonly misunderstood by lay people, we are better off using a word that ordinary lay people actually understand -- the word `fact.' ''

Wilson's screed illustrates why, with friends like that, science doesn't need enemies. It is because he thinks scientists claim to be ``gods of certainty'' that Wilson can write that they're arrogant jerks who won't stand for disagreement: ``How dare mere politicians question their judgments? They are scientists, aren't they? And what scientists say must be taken as true.''

Exactly backwards, again. Real scientists live for disagreement -- it's by their questioning each other, and themselves, that science advances. When they deny their respect to some ``point of view,'' the trouble isn't what the crank believes, but how he came to believe it. Scientists don't defend today's theory as eternal truth. They defend the methods that produced it: the gathering of evidence by rigorous means, and the evaluation of that evidence by logical, testable procedures.

Wilson hates those methods because they can lead people away from the traditional and familiar. (The trigger for his rant was a claim, by the chair of the government's scientific panel on drug abuse, that marijuana causes less harm in Britain than do alcohol and tobacco.) ``The trouble with a 'scientific' argument,'' Wilson writes, ``is that it is not made in the real world, but in a laboratory by an unimaginative academic relying solely on empirical facts.''

Substitute ``glory of'' for ``trouble with '' and you have a good credo for the scientific method. And that's what merits a defense. When, instead, people claim that science is about its True and Certain results, they play into the hands of people like A.N. Wilson, who want to represent rigor as credentialism, and hard-won insights as the false doctrines of a modern Inquisition. (Science-as-Inquisition is his image, by the way. Guess the Hitler allusion was too mild to make the point on its own.)

Because the word ``theory'' is so wantonly misunderstood by lay people, I submit, scientists should work hard to make it better understood. Scientific infantilism is not their friend.

LinkedIn meets Tinder in this mindful networking app

Swipe right to make the connections that could change your career.

Getty Images
Sponsored
Swipe right. Match. Meet over coffee or set up a call.

No, we aren't talking about Tinder. Introducing Shapr, a free app that helps people with synergistic professional goals and skill sets easily meet and collaborate.

Keep reading Show less

The dos and don’ts of helping a drug-addicted person recover

How you talk to people with drug addiction might save their life.

Videos
  • Addiction is a learning disorder; it's not a sign that someone is a bad person.
  • Tough love doesn't help drug-addicted people. Research shows that the best way to get people help is through compassion, empathy and support. Approach them as an equal human being deserving of respect.
  • As a first step to recovery, Maia Szalavitz recommends the family or friends of people with addiction get them a complete psychiatric evaluation by somebody who is not affiliated with any treatment organization. Unfortunately, warns Szalavitz, some people will try to make a profit off of an addicted person without informing them of their full options.
Keep reading Show less

10 science photos that made history and changed minds

These photos of scientific heroes and accomplishments inspire awe and curiosity.

Surprising Science
  • Science has given humanity an incalculable boost over the recent centuries, changing our lives in ways both awe-inspiring and humbling.
  • Fortunately, photography, a scientific feat in and of itself, has recorded some of the most important events, people and discoveries in science, allowing us unprecedented insight and expanding our view of the world.
  • Here are some of the most important scientific photos of history:
Keep reading Show less

In a first for humankind, China successfully sprouts a seed on the Moon

China's Chang'e 4 biosphere experiment marks a first for humankind.

Image source: CNSA
Surprising Science
  • China's Chang'e 4 lunar lander touched down on the far side of the moon on January 3.
  • In addition to a lunar rover, the lander carried a biosphere experiment that contains five sets of plants and some insects.
  • The experiment is designed to test how astronauts might someday grow plants in space to sustain long-term settlements.
Keep reading Show less