Preview

Joel Achenbach's Article, Why Do Many Reasonable People Justify Science?

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
443 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Joel Achenbach's Article, Why Do Many Reasonable People Justify Science?
In the article,"Why do many Reasonable People doubt Science?", the writer, Joel Achenbach, asserts that people disbelief science for a variety of reasons. He first described dogmatism and naive beliefs, which are subconscious intuitions that people cling to, to be the reason why many disbelieve science. He further explains that many are reliant on personal experience and anecdotes rather than hard facts and statistics to come to conclusions and that is why many disagree with scientific findings. Achenbach, in his article, also mentioned that, another reason for the disbelief of science is political where "disbelievers", claim that the purport of science, especially in the aspects of climate change, is a propaganda of climate activists and environmentalists who seek to employ the idea of global warming to attack the free market and industrial society. He also mentioned that the disbelief is science is caused the fact that, …show more content…
In this essay, however, the focus will directed at the writer’s assertion that, many stick to naive beliefs and dogma based on personal experience and anecdotes on the which basis they disbelief scientific findings. in his article, Achenbach begins the disbelief in the fluoridation of water using from a piece in the comic Dr. Strangelove where a group captain in the Royal Air Force, Madrake, is introduced to fluoridation of water as a dangerous communist plot. According to the writer, many people, being ignorant of the established scientific facts cling to their own intuitions and form a belief system that is incredibly laborious to alter. Basing their conclusions on personal experiences rather than data findings and

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    In this essay, John M. Barry uses antithesis to display a contrast in his thoughts and the assuming thoughts of the readers. In doing this, the author is not only able to show the readers the different sides of how scientists are perceived by people, but as well as how they actually are in the world of scientific research. The author collates certainty and uncertainty as an example for the readers to view that scientists of the world are just like them. Scientists contain “certainty, [which] creates strength, and uncertainty, [which] creates weakness” (Barry). In using these disparities, Barry is showing the readers that “science teaches us to doubt” (Barry). By elaborating on the concepts of certainty and uncertainty, readers are able to see…

    • 183 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    In March of 1992, Dr. Richard Sanford wrote an outspoken paper opposing the claims of the global warming hysteria of recent time. Sanford discusses how people accept global warming theories as scientific fact without questioning their validity. I can honestly say that I was one of these people who agreed with the media's interpretation of these theories. After reviewing the pro global warming material in the course text, Environmental Science, written by G. Tyler Miller, and reading several articles on the opposition of global warming, I find myself becoming not a hardcore skeptic, but someone that will no longer take information at face value without reviewing as many of the particulars as possible.…

    • 269 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Science has evolved over the years. New machines have been invented over the past years which make it easier for scientist and their experiments. John M. Barry author of The Great Influenza specifically targets scientist and their research. He argues that a good scientist knows that there may be doubts, or that their assumptions may be proven wrong but they don’t stop trying.…

    • 202 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Best Essays

    The book, “The Island of Dr. Moreau” by H.G. Wells has been taken as a base to analyze the significance of science from the perspective of the characters in the book. Science has been a major developmental language since its inception. All the scientists are working in collaboration to generate a society that is well defined and well supported by the principles of nature. Science has been successful in accomplishing what is known as evolution and has also been able to ease the life of humans but there certain aspects that are still under discussion including the creation of ideal human being. This is the main idea being utilized by the book when the word “island” is being used. This island is referring to a creation which is being analyzed differently by every character in this book. The main perception of the book came as negativity on the part of Doctor Moreau as a scientist because he fails to perceive what science really is and how different principles of nature should be integrated to build a society where everyone can thrive. This idea has been taken as a base to formulate the essay. The thesis of the paper is to justify that language of science is negatively affecting community and fails to define human characteristics as depicted by the characters of the book and social Endeavour created by Doctor Moreau. For justifying the argument the essay has been divided into two major sections: a brief summary indicating the role of every character in the novel and discussion of the main thesis. The argument will be supported by quotations of the characters from the book as these are the main bodies depicting that science is not what it is believed to be, and the study of the literature. Authentic journals and peer reviewed articles will be utilized for the purpose of achieving the task of supporting main ideas.…

    • 1595 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Best Essays
  • Good Essays

    Comparative Analysis

    • 869 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Concerning Climate Change “Clear, Catastrophic threats, Manne opens the article with an anecdote, that a “part of the english syllabus [as a schoolboy] was “clear thinking”” (Manne 2011). This anecdote should set up a relevance and an accessibility to the reader drawing them in and sympathising with the argument that will be put forward. Almost a third of the article is dense with data. “1500 or so leading climate scientists” (Manne 2011), “928 scientific papers” (Manne 2011), “...peer­reviewed scientific journals” (Manne 2011), a part of a letter written to every US senator from the American Association for the Advancement of Science in regards to climate change. Following this Manne uses an appeal to authority as a persuasive technique. Climate change being an issue where expertise is paramount, the use of authority anchors the argument to what is right and wrong, clear. Manne does this by bringing up Naomi Oreskes, a historian of science, whose work showed evidence of the consensus of the fundamental theory of climate change. The work was included in the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, in which it was the basis of the report. Finally, and probably most importantly, the article uses science as an authority. Science deals with facts and evidence, therefore using a definate as an authority it is effective in persuading the reader that the stance of the article is the right stance.…

    • 869 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Matt Patterson argues in “Global Warming – The Great Delusion” that the alleged scientific consensus surrounding the theory of global warming is based not on fact, but rather on a web of mass hysteria and deceit. Patterson contends that “In fact, global warming is the most widespread mass hysteria in our species’ history”, and that the beliefs of global warming proponents are the result of their own delusional imaginations and a subconscious apocalyptic yearning toward which masses of people tend to subject themselves. While Patterson worries that what he perceives to be the delusions of global warming proponents run amok could prove to be a legitimate threat to the progress of Man, he argues that there is a growing trend of dissenters to the theory among the scientific community that will break the supposed fever of global warming hysteria.…

    • 1310 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Evaluating aspects from a scientific perspective is not limited to only people who are pursuing science as a career or major. Atul Gawande, respected surgeon and author, understands this concept well and works to encourage the public to trust in testing a hypothesis no matter how profound. Through utilizing the strategies of incorporating personal experience, rhetorical questions, and a motivational tone, Gawande’s article, The Mistrust of Science, pushes readers to face challenges without a doubt.…

    • 655 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    There are always two sides to an issue. This is especially true in Science. Each side will gather facts and statistics to help their argument. They will also fuel the argument with their opinions. Some articles are more persuasive in their reasoning then others. This persuasion can ultimately change a person’s opinion of the issue. The question to be answered is does human-produced carbon dioxide contribute significantly to global warming.…

    • 991 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    When new information comes out about climate change it is easy to accept that information if it confirms something you had believed prior to (37). So when information that goes against your current position on climate change comes out it is hard to accept as being something positive. This attitude is what leads to comparisons being made to nearly every negative time in our history.…

    • 572 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Science has had a huge impact on society in the past few centuries with medicines curing disastrous diseases and the growing success of technology. This success has led to a widespread belief in science; believing science can deliver well to the people in society. However, this success has been dimmed by science causing problems; for example global warming and pollution as these are both products of science. However the good and bad effects of science show features distinguishing it from other belief systems as it enables us to explain predict and control the world in a way that non-scientific or pre scientific belief systems cannot do. Science is a belief system as it fills the gaps which ideology and religion cannot fill and science also makes sense of the world around us. An example of this is science explains why earth is the perfect environment for humans to live on. However, Rationalists point out that science is based on fact, whereas beliefs are not: they rely on faith. Therefore, Rationalists argue that science is not a belief system. Dawkins put forward that science is based on evidence so science cannot be a belief system. Whereas some people use science to explain the world but we need to have faith in science, an example of this can be in regards to cures for cancer. Therefore people have faith in system and would claim science is a…

    • 1003 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Stories sometimes are true and sometimes they are false but it is up to the public to believe in what is right and what is wrong. In this day and age, where information is available at the touch of a mouse, it’s not surprising that the media is a particularly dominant and powerful force in our civilization. Research has shown that the newspapers are the public’s primary source of information on scientific issues.…

    • 1316 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Some ideas and theories in science meet with resistance. One of the examples when an idea is meeting with the resistance is immunization. More often children immunization meets with public resistance. As the vaccination of children is parents' decision many decides not to do it. Data published by NHS show that there is high number of measles reported due to 1-16 years old children who missed the vaccinations between 1990s and 2000s. In 2012 the numbers of cases was 2,000. The fears are now concerned on the MMR vaccination, as now there is also a big group of children who did not received their vaccination. NHS urge parents to ensure their children receive the vaccination.…

    • 678 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The public’s attitude towards science is something that is least talked about in our society. Even in schools, teaching students about how scientists communicate with the public is given the least importance. As a result, I think most people who are involved in science disciplines are not sure how to respond when they come across this question.…

    • 479 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    According to Popper science is an open belief system where every scientist’s theories are open to scrutiny, criticised and tested by others. He says that science is governed by the principle of falsificationism. This is whereby scientists set out to try and falsify existing theories, deliberately seeking evidence that would disprove them. Such as the fact that the big bang is a theory that everyone accepts but there is much more that scientists do not know and more needed to be found therefore it could be false. It argues that there always can be more and more evidence for every theory that has ever been made and proven. Then when disproving these knowledge claims allows scientific world to grow. It is cumulative, whereby it builds on achievements of previous scientists. This explanation shows that science can be a belief system as nothing can ever be proven 100% as there will always be something or someone that will disprove a theory with other evidence and therefore people belief what they have been told. This is much like religion in a way by the fact that religion cannot be proven it is something that people belief in.…

    • 1795 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Better Essays

    According to Michael Mann, he and other scientist over the past decades have become the victims of retaliations by certain special interest groups, politicians, industries or ideologues who vehemently disagree with their climate change research and are trying to discredit or diminish the findings of their research. Understandably, their critics are unhappy with their research or findings. Subsequently, they are repeatedly ridiculed and accused of overstating or exaggerate the facts of their research regarding the effects of greenhouse emissions by their critics.…

    • 1828 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Better Essays