You are here: Home
Metaphors & SoundbitesSkepticism & CredibilitySkepticism/Denial - GeneralAll good scientists are skeptics. 'Nobody's word'
Metaphors & SoundbitesSkepticism & CredibilitySkepticism/Denial - GeneralAll good scientists are skeptics. 'Nobody's word'All good scientists are skeptics. 'Nobody's word' Featured
All scientists are skeptics. The motto of UK's 350-year-old Royal Society is 'Nullius in verba,' Latin for "On the words of no one" or "take nobody's word for it." It is "an expression of its enduring commitment to empirical evidence as the basis of knowledge about the natural world."
Notes: The American counterpart to the Royal Society is the U.S. National Academy of Science. The mission of science academies is to assess and summarize the state of scientific knowledge to support informed decision-making.
Since 2001, every major scientific academy in the world (32) has issued a statement concluding that human activity is causing the earth to warm, and urging governments to act. Their statements are indexed on Wikipedia.
Scientific scepticism is open-minded skepticism. Questioning everything, demanding to see all the evidence before drawying conclusions, but staying open to new evidence and modifying one's position as new evidence becomes available. In contrast, closed-minded skepticism is simply denial -- refusing to reconsider preconceptions in the face of new evidence.
Bite Source: inspired by Joe Romm, Climate Progress.
Image Source: here
Rating
2 votes
Com (1)
byJohn Russell
April 4, 2012
Here's the latest development of this idea, paraphrased from an argument I had with a 'fake sceptic'...
To be scientific is to be sceptical (undoubtedly true).
Therefore all sceptics are scientific (undoubtedly not true).
Hence all those who are not sceptical of climate science must be anti-science and thus driven by ideology.
This argument is being used by many sceptics to validate their unremitting search for uncertainties in climate science, because they conflate uncertainty with ignorance, and the idea scientists are ignorant fits their agenda. See the conclusions of this critique:
https://workspace.imperial.ac.uk/climatechange/Public/pdfs/Opinion%20pieces/Critique%20of%20Lindzen%27s%20lecture.pdf
Best wishes,
JR
To be scientific is to be sceptical (undoubtedly true).
Therefore all sceptics are scientific (undoubtedly not true).
Hence all those who are not sceptical of climate science must be anti-science and thus driven by ideology.
This argument is being used by many sceptics to validate their unremitting search for uncertainties in climate science, because they conflate uncertainty with ignorance, and the idea scientists are ignorant fits their agenda. See the conclusions of this critique:
https://workspace.imperial.ac.uk/climatechange/Public/pdfs/Opinion%20pieces/Critique%20of%20Lindzen%27s%20lecture.pdf
Best wishes,
JR