Scientific controversy

Last updated
Six of Diamonds, When Doctors Disagree, from Harlequin Cards, 2nd Series (N220) issued by Kinney Bros. MET DPB872267.jpg

Sustained scientific controversy [1] , sometimes scientific debate is any substantial disagreement among scientists. A scientific controversy may involve issues such as the interpretation of data, which ideas are most supported by evidence, and/or which ideas are most worth pursuing. [1]

Contents

Controversies between scientific and non-scientific ideas are not within the realm of science and are not true scientific controversies. [2] A genuine scientific controversy entails an ongoing discussion within the wider scientific community. [3] Well known examples include the debate over the existence of the atom that lasted until the turn of the 20th century, the Bohr–Einstein debates, the linguistics wars, and the debate over the causes of ADHD.

Intra-academic debate

Constructive debate within the scientific community is widely viewed as essential to the progress of science as a whole. Critique and debate leads to an environment in which ideas are rigorously and extensively cross-tested and in which mistakes which one individual might not catch are able to be justified by another, and additionally, the environment can push the development of new research programs, discovery of new evidence, and the forward movement of scientific consensus. [4] [5]

Debate among scientists within a primarily academic setting can take one of many forms: two important forms, for example, are writing/review and conference discussions. Academic review and critique often occurs through technical review in journals; more uncommonly, external platforms such as PubPeer are utilized.

When considering the scope of an individual paper, we can say that scientific critique often is prompted by one of a few originating concerns: often the concern is methodological, that is, concerned with the technical validity of the paper; oftentimes it is ethical, dealing with the implications of the paper or disputing the ethicality of its research methods; and other times, the concern is with possible scientific fraud.

Conflict with beliefs

In the situation of even presenting clear and scientifically proven evidence, people will always have their own opinion. "Controversy can be rooted in differing beliefs and values; personal, political, social, and economic interests; fears; and moral and ethical considerations—all of which are central to decisions and typically subject to public debate". [6]

As described above, individuals have their opinions based on various subjects such as culture, history, ethics, morals, religion, and more. This leads the stance on certain scientific topics to be very different across the board as perceptions vary from person to person, this is the ultimate reason why scientific controversy exists, to begin with. Science-related controversies often follow similar characteristics.

  1. Conflict over personal beliefs, values, and interests
  2. Public perception
  3. Voices behind opinions presented to the public

With science being inconclusive in itself, it leads to a disconnect between individuals. Oftentimes, science gets roped into personal morals and social values which leads to contrasting ideas. [7] This arises the issue of communicating science in an appropriate manner. Listed below, there are some of the various examples of scientific controversies.

See also

References

  1. 1 2 Anne E. Egger, Ph.D., and Ph.D. Anthony Carpi. “Scientific Controversy: Process of Science.” Visionlearning, Visionlearning, Inc., 12 Feb. 2017, www.visionlearning.com/en/library/Process-of-Science/49/Scientific-Controversy/181.
  2. ↑ What Controversy: Is a Controversy Misrepresented or Blown out of Proportion?, undsci.berkeley.edu/article/0_0_0/sciencetoolkit_06.
  3. ↑ McMullin, Ernan (1987-03-27). "Scientific controversy and its termination". Scientific Controversies. Cambridge University Press. pp. 49–92. doi:10.1017/cbo9780511628719.004. ISBN   978-0-521-25565-3.
  4. ↑ Cruz, H. D. & Smedt, J. D. The value of epistemic disagreement in scientific practice. The case of Homo floresiensis. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 44, 169–177 (2013)
  5. ↑ The power of disagreement. Nat Methods13, 185 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.3798
  6. ↑ "Home - Books - NCBI." National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books.
  7. ↑ What Are Personal Morals and Values?, askinglot.com/what-are-personal-morals-and-values.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.