Jul 8, 2010

skepticism no longer a virtue... political consensus trumps science

A great post by "Derek Winstanley" that is more timely than when I read it nearly a decade ago:
IN SUPPORT OF SKEPTICISM
Derek Winstanley Chief 1997 - 2008"Most institutions demand unqualified faith; but the institution of science makes skepticism a virtue."

...In recent decades, investigations of major environmental issues such as climate change, acid rain, smog, and hypoxia have resulted in the conduct of complex integrated assessments. Such assessments organize information for the purpose of improving the effectiveness of policy making.

In policy making, especially in a political arena, consensus building is a key ingredient. In attempts to make science relevant and useful, the politics of democracy tend to promote, even in some cases demand "scientific consensus." However, as a "community of belief" develops, skepticism is no longer regarded as a virtue. In a civilization that is founded on science, this is an unfortunate state of affairs and detrimental to our future.

In order to appreciate this concern, it is necessary to revisit the central role of skepticism in science. Let us start with a dictionary definition of skepticism. Webster's Dictionary defines skepticism as: "A critical attitude towards any theory, statement, experiment, or phenomenon, doubting the certainty of all things until adequate proof has been produced; the scientific spirit." The Greek root of skepticism is identified as "skepticos", which means "thoughtful, inquiring."

...Scientific progress is made by accepting or rejecting hypotheses at specified levels of confidence, thus embodying skepticism in the heart of scientific methodology.

Please read on at source here

Haase - "Skepticism is the difference between Science and science"