Second Thought About the Idea of “Consensus”
Sarah Chaffee
December 19, 2017, 1:01 PM
https://evolutionnews.org/2017/12/se...-of-consensus/
“Consensus science.” That is
a phrase you hear invoked a lot, as if identifying a “consensus” should be enough to settle any scientific question. But
sometimes scientists do not, in fact, follow the evidence. The consensus, then, could be wrong.
In an article for
Quilette, Professor Jonathan Anomaly at the University of Arizona writes, “I want to explore some explanations for why we might be justified in believing
a hypothesis that scientists shy away from even when that hypothesis is consistent with the best available evidence.”....
....Regarding the origins of the universe, of life, and of mankind, we see
strong bias against following the evidence where it leads.
Anomaly notes,
“Science is the best method we have for understanding the world. But to the extent that its success requires a willingness to entertain ideas that conflict with our deepest desires, scientific progress on politically contentious topics tends to be slow.”
The opposition we encounter to entertaining evidence supporting intelligent design is not necessarily driven by
hard scientific data. Instead, I think it is
driven by politics and groupthink in the scientific community.
So the next time you hear that there is a scientific consensus on evolution, be prepared to push back.
Ask what that “consensus” is based on. The evidence?
Or something else?