Even most scientists don’t realize that science is a psycho-societal enterprise
Even most scientists don’t realize that science is a psycho-societal enterprise
….which is yet another reason they’re prone to groupthink
I now find myself often pointing out to climate panic mongers that they need to step back and ask if their supposed evidence for doom is sound, because they’re showing all the signs of being in a groupthink.
Some have in effect replied, “You brought psychology to a science discussion.”
This is a common misunderstanding of science, in at least three respects.
(1) First, science is an epistemic enterprise. It’s all about reliable ways of coming to know things. Or, more weakly, of coming to have confidence in some hypotheses over others. Note those two words: “know” and “confidence.” Psychological terms. Our notions of statistical significance and confidence intervals are ways of getting at this, but rely on strong assumptions about what one’s confidence across the many possible hypotheses were before having seen any evidence (“priors”). If you or your community did not have the sorts of priors assumed (because perhaps there are biases), the standard significance tests strictly don’t apply.
(2) Second, the process of generating new hypotheses is not
itself scientific, but an ineffable creative art of sorts. Scientific communities can be as scientific as they wish, but if they’re lacking the right hypotheses, they won’t be fruitful. And there are loads of psychosocial reasons for why communities might be handicapped in finding the right sorts of hypotheses.
(3) Third, science isn’t just what occurs in science publications. Science is a massive social enterprise, with some scientists rising in reputation over time, and some falling. These rising and falling fortunes are not done via statistical tests via some central committee, but by our natural socioemotional instincts. Such “free markets” of scientific ideas tend to lead over time toward the truth. But by no means is it a linear march. It can easily move sideways or slide backwards for generations, and especially so if there are censorial forces at work hindering its decentralized mechanisms.
Science is ultimately a complex psychosocietal phenomenon, not some super-logical and abstract machine outputting truths.
And even the average scientist is not fully aware of this.
Some further content along these lines…
(a) Understanding how our inferences depend on our conceptual frameworks. Chapter 3 from my first book, Brain from 25000 Feet.
https://www.changizi.com/uploads/8/3/4/4/83445868/changizibrain25000chapter3.pdf
(b) Foundations of free expression and how social networks lead to rises and falls of reputation of individuals, my sixth book, Expressly Human.