Why Ordinary People Distrust Scientists: An Analysis

Introduction

Nearly everyone I know trusts people they consider to be scientists in fields of the scientist's expertise for which there are no obvious conflicts of interests. If an astronomer tells you there's going to be an eclipse you believe her. If a geologist tells you you're looking at a schist you believe him.

The Basis of Trust in Scientists

However, distrust arises when people who claim to be scientists but are not accepted members of a community with a history of reliability make claims in their respective fields. Distrust often extends to those in fields like nutrition, psychology, and economics—the news is filled with click-bait claims by people who are seemingly credentialed in these fields, and few of these claims last more than a few days.

These non-scientists must win credibility through an established record of accuracy, logical support for claims, and empirical evidence. They cannot rely on the privileges that come with being a scientist, such as the "believe me I'm a scientist" card. Over time, scientists gain trust through their expertise in a field, their reliability, and their ability to support their claims with evidence.

Additional Sources of Distrust

There are further sources of distrust:

Stepping Outside Their Fields of Expertise: A brilliant physicist might have foolish ideas about taxes or foreign policy. A geologist can have wacky opinions about sexual behavior. Conflicts of Interest: If a physicist tells you a trillion-dollar supercollider is the best use of taxpayer money she doesn't get the same respect as when she's counting cosmic rays. If a geologist is promoting a rule that all mines must have a PhD geologist overseeing operations you take that with a grain of salt.

It is essential to recognize that while these factors can lead to distrust, scientists have made significant contributions to various aspects of modern life. For example, scientists make medicine, make building houses possible, and contribute to the production of cheese, milk, and yogurt. Even the digital camera, movie effects, and computers you use on a daily basis are the result of scientific advancements.

There are also those who do not inherently trust scientists. Morons who fear science and are easily gullible by people who talk loud don't trust scientists but don't know why. They think we have invented bots the size of viruses that have wifi and internet connection. Those people really do believe in science, but they themselves believe in digital cameras, movie effects, computers, and so forth. They are just stupid.

People who do not trust scientists are often comforted by the misconception that they are not gullible. However, the fact remains that scientists have made groundbreaking contributions that have changed and improved our lives. If you are in a group of anti-science people, look over that crowd and ask yourself, 'Would I really take a life-altering decision from anyone of them?' Would I allow anyone there to remove cancer from me?' If the answer is no, then you do trust science. Have you been on an airplane? Driven a car? Do you live in a building on many floors, all designed and engineered by scientists? Some of them are engineers, computer programmers, chemical engineers, electricians, plumbers, and many more. All have a science background, math, physics, and more.

In conclusion, while there are valid reasons for distrust in scientists, it is important to recognize the significant contributions made by these individuals and the impact of their work on our daily lives. The trust we place in scientists is based on their expertise, reliability, and the evidence that supports their claims.

Keywords: scientists, trust, conflicts of interest