Display options
Cite
Solomon M. Trust: The Need for Public Understanding of How Science Works. Hastings Cent Rep. 2021;51:S36-S39doi: 10.1002/hast.1227.
Solomon, M. (2021). Trust: The Need for Public Understanding of How Science Works. The Hastings Center report, 51S36-S39. https://doi.org/10.1002/hast.1227
Solomon, Miriam. "Trust: The Need for Public Understanding of How Science Works." The Hastings Center report vol. 51 (2021): S36-S39. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/hast.1227
Solomon M. Trust: The Need for Public Understanding of How Science Works. Hastings Cent Rep. 2021 Jan;51:S36-S39. doi: 10.1002/hast.1227. PMID: 33630343.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Hastings Cent Rep. 2021 Jan;51:S36-S39. doi: 10.1002/hast.1227.

Trust: The Need for Public Understanding of How Science Works.

The Hastings Center report

Miriam Solomon

PMID: 33630343 DOI: 10.1002/hast.1227

Abstract

General science literacy contributes to good public decision-making about technology and medicine. This essay explores the kinds of science literacy currently developed by public education in the United States of America. It argues that current curricula on "science as inquiry" (formerly the "nature of science") need to be brought up to date with the inclusion of discussion of social epistemological concepts such as trust and scientific authority, scientific disagreement versus science denialism, the role of ideology and bias in scientific research, and the importance of peer review and responsiveness to criticism.

© 2021 The Hastings Center.

Keywords: Helen Longino; Naomi Oreskes; authority; bias; consensus; disagreement; peer review; science education; trust

References

  1. M. Levinson and M. Z. Solomon, “Can Our Schools Help Us Preserve Democracy? Special Challenges at a Time of Shifting Norms,” and S. Jasanoff, “The Vanishing Square: Civic Learning in the Internet Age,” both in Democracy in Crisis: Civic Learning and the Reconstruction of Common Purpose, ed. G. E. Kaebnick et al., special report, Hastings Center Report 51, no. 1 (2021): S15-S22 and S5-S9, respectively. - PubMed
  2. National Research Council, National Science Education Standards (Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1996), at https://www.nap.edu/catalog/4962/national-science-education-standards. - PubMed
  3. Pennsylvania Department of Education, Academic Standards for Science and Technology, 2002, https://www.stateboard.education.pa.gov/Documents/Regulations%20and%20Statements/State%20Academic%20Standards/ScienceandTechnologyStandards.pdf. - PubMed
  4. G. E. Kaebnick, “Civic Learning When the Facts Are Politicized: How Values Shape Facts, and What to Do about It,” in Democracy in Crisis: Civic Learning and the Reconstruction of Common Purpose, ed. G. E. Kaebnick et al., special report, Hastings Center Report 51, no. 1 (2021): S40-S45. - PubMed
  5. N. Oreskes and E. M. Conway, Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming, 1st U.S. ed. (New York: Bloomsbury Press, 2010). - PubMed
  6. T. S. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962). - PubMed
  7. H. M. Collins and T. J. Pinch, The Golem: What Everyone Should Know about Science (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993). - PubMed
  8. N. Oreskes, “Beyond the Ivory Tower: The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change,” Science 306 (2004): 1686. - PubMed
  9. S. Harding, Objectivity and Diversity: Another Logic of Scientific Research (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2015). - PubMed
  10. N. Oreskes, “The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change: How Do We Know We're Not Wrong?,” in Climate Change: What It Means for Us, Our Children, and Our Grandchildren, ed. J. F. DiMento and P. Doughman (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2007), 65-101. - PubMed
  11. H. E. Longino, Science as Social Knowledge: Values and Objectivity in Scientific Inquiry (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1990). - PubMed
  12. A. I. Goldman, “Experts: Which Ones Should You Trust?,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 63, no. 1 (2001): 85-110; M. Solomon, Social Empiricism (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2001); C. J. Lee, “Commensuration Bias in Peer Review,” Philosophy of Science 82, no. 4 (2015): 1272-83. - PubMed

MeSH terms

Publication Types