Shopping Cart -

Your cart is currently empty.
Continue Shopping
This website use cookies and similar technologies to improve the site and to provide customised content and advertising. By using this site, you agree to this use. To learn more, including how to change your cookie settings, please view our Cookie Policy
Pocketmags Digital Magazines
Pocketmags Digital Magazines

Politicization of Scientific Issues

Although I was one of the good guys in getting my degrees, and I love science with all my heart, I couldn’t help but object to one of Dr. Goldberg’s conclusions in her September/October article on “Politicization of Scientific Issues.” I am alarmed that this is a fact, but I was also alarmed that she thinks that science is “democratic” because you can hypothesize and reason about your hypothesis. To be democratic you would have to abide by the vote of some kind of public. I know how scientists gather sometimes and argue vociferously also sometimes, but that isn’t voting. To say that publication invites criticism and some kind of concurrence of opinion and that this is some type of substitute for voting doesn’t make it democratic. Newspapers also individually publish the truth as they see it and engender opinion, and democracy allows this laudable behavior, but the opinions themselves can’t be said to be democratic.

Purchase options below
Find the complete article and many more in this issue of Skeptical Inquirer - January February 2018
If you own the issue, Login to read the full article now.
Single Issue - January February 2018
Or 299 points
Annual Digital Subscription
Only $ 2.83 per issue
Or 1699 points

View Issues

About Skeptical Inquirer

A SKEPTIC'S GUIDE TO RACISM Critical Thinking Approaches to Confronting Racism Why Pseudoscience Should Be Taught in College A Cancer Nurse Examines Alternative Medicine

Other Articles in this Issue