deepstash

Beta

deepstash

Beta

George

@georgeb787

The scientific method: a hard discipline

This is true even for scientists, because they’re exposed confirmation bias too (searching for and picking up only evidence that confirms what someone already believes).

But unlike the rest of us, they submit their ideas to formal peer review before publishing them. Once their results are published, other scientists will try to reproduce them (if they have enough relevance and importance) and, being naturally skeptical and competitive, they will denounce them if they don’t hold up.

153 SAVES

391 READS

IDEA EXTRACTED FROM:

Why Do Many Reasonable People Doubt Science?

nationalgeographic.com

TOPICS IN THIS IDEA

Problem Solving

The Mistrust of Science

Atul Gawande on what it means to be a scientist in a time of increasing mistrust toward the scientific community.

newyorker.com

The Scientific Mind

The mind of a scientist cannot be that just a set of beliefs. It has to be an objective, open and experimental mind. A scientific way of thinking is always systematic, based on testing, bui...

Not Trusting Scientific Knowledge

Though science has helped humanity for centuries, it is not fully trusted. Part of the reason is that scientific knowledge is incomplete.

It is often resisted by a section of people, who don’t believe in vaccines, climate change, or the man-made genetic advancement in crops. As an example, many families believe vaccination causes autism in children, and no matter what is done to counter it, the belief is stuck in people’s brains.

Science And Pseudoscience

Many people from all sections of society do not trust in science, as they don’t trust the authority of the scientific community. The Pseudo Scientists try to debunk science by:

Arguing that the entire scientific consensus is a conspiracy.
Getting fake experts to produce information that contradicts scientific findings.
Argue using selective data, and using a small example to discredit the entire field.
Deploying false analogies and other fallacies that appear logical.
Setting impossible expectations and counter-arguments towards the scientists.

2 more ideas

Thomas Hendricks

@rhendricks

Scientists, Stop Thinking Explaining Science Will Fix Things. It Won't.

If you consider yourself to have even a passing familiarity with science, you likely find yourself in a state of disbelief as the president of the United States calls climate scientists " hoaxsters" and pushes conspiracy theories about vaccines. The Trump administration seems practically allergic to evidence.

slate.com

Explaining Science

There is a lot of misinformation about scientific knowledge among the general public. Scientists assume that by explaining science to people they can inform the defend science from public misinform...

Science Literacy

Studies prove that merely increasing science literacy straightforwardly is not going to change mindsets. Simply knowing more and lecturing about it is not going to convince the audience.

Scientists should consider how they are deploying knowledge. Facts aren't enough, and they need to tap into the emotions of the audience for fruitful interaction.

Communicating about Science

Strategy and rhetorician skills need to be deployed, as merely lecturing like a university professor isn't going to do any good:

Simply explaining science does not tell the audience why it matters to them, and doesn't 'hard sell' the purpose or the motivation of the right information.
Communicating science without first gaining the audience's trust is bound to be a vain exercise.
Trying to debunk a myth by repeating it and saying it's false, doesn't do any good, as the audience ends up remembering the myth only. A better way is to reframe the issue.

James E.

@jam_iee52

Cherry Picking: When People Ignore Evidence that They Dislike

Cherry picking is a logical fallacy which occurs when someone focuses only on evidence which supports their stance, while ignoring evidence which contradicts it. For example, a person who engages in cherry picking might mention only a small number of studies out of all the studies which were published on a certain topic, in an attempt to make it look as if the scientific consensus matches their stance.

effectiviology.com

Cherry picking

It is a logical fallacy and it happens when we choose and focus only on evidence that supports our views and arguments while ignoring anything that may contradict us.

The problem with cherry picking

It fails to take into consideration all the available information
It presents information in a misleading way.
It might lead to improper analysis and might cause someone to paint a misleading picture of a certain outcome.

The principle of total evidence

Also referred to as Bernoulli’s maxim, it states that, when assessing the probability that a certain hypothesis is true, we must take into account all the available information.

3 more ideas

deepstash

helps you become inspired, wiser and productive, through bite-sized ideas from the best articles, books and videos out there.

Over 2M Installs

4.75 App Score

Deepstash is better on the app. Discover new ideas and get inspired daily.