| Revision as of 11:36, 12 September 2005 editHaiduc (talk | contribs)15,071 edits more on the recent use of the term← Previous edit | Revision as of 11:38, 12 September 2005 edit undoHaiduc (talk | contribs)15,071 edits see also section + linkNext edit → | ||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
| The media also play a role in the creation and propagation of controversies and the view that certain fields of science are controversial. In "Optimising Public Understanding of Science: A Comparative Perspective" by Jan Nolin et al., the authors claim that ''From a media perspective it is evident that controversial science sells, not only because of its dramatic value but also since it is often connected to high-stake societal issues.'' | The media also play a role in the creation and propagation of controversies and the view that certain fields of science are controversial. In "Optimising Public Understanding of Science: A Comparative Perspective" by Jan Nolin et al., the authors claim that ''From a media perspective it is evident that controversial science sells, not only because of its dramatic value but also since it is often connected to high-stake societal issues.'' | ||
| ==See also== | |||
| *] | |||
| ==References== | ==References== | ||
Revision as of 11:38, 12 September 2005
 | It has been suggested that this article be merged with pseudoscience. (Discuss) |
Science is a domain of knowledge that is controversial by its very nature, in that what is considered to be "established fact," itself a provisional state, is determined through a process of challenge and debate in which one school of thought emerges, for a time, victorious over the others. Such debates are never offically settled with any finality whatsoever, and it is expected that if and when conflicting evidence is discovered and confirmed, the science will be modified to include that discovery. As Sharon Dunwoody writes in Communicating Uncertainty, "all science is inherently uncertain."
The term controversial science however has been traditionally used of those ideas and theories which have been advanced by individuals either from outside the field of science which they are addressing and in which they are proposing views at odds with generally agreed-upon findings, or from scientists outside the mainstream of their own disciplines. An example of controversial science is the work of Wilhelm Reich a psychiatrist whose work with "orgone," a physical energy he claimed to have discovered, contributed to his alienation from the psychiatric community and eventually resulted in his jailing. A similar case was that of Linus Pauling, who advanced the theoty that large amounts of vitamin C functioned as a panacea for a whole host of diseases, a claim that has largely been refuted.
Another use of the term is in describing fields of knowledge which are not, for lack of evidence or confirmability, recognized as bona fide sciences. This use of "controversial science" is subsumed by the term pseudoscience. Included in this category are notions about super-natural phenomena, reflected in the title of a work on the supernatural, "Parapsychology: The Controversial Science," alien abductions, flying saucers and so on.
Towards the end of the 20th century, religiously inspired critics of certain fields of scientific research attempted to brand as "controversial" a host of scientific fields wich contradicted literal or fundamentalist readings of certain ancient religious texts, taking the fact that scientific debate on certain aspects of those topics continued as evidence that their findings were not conclusively valid. This was claimed to have left open a window for divine intervention and intelligent design. Among these fields were paleo-anthropology, human sexuality, evolution, geology, and paleontology.
However, such attempts are dismissed by epistemologists as being the result of a misunderstanding of the scientific process, seen by scientists to be akin to a dialogue, which has no conclusion, and by some in the public as a debate which should have ultimate winners and losers. As Dr. Donald E. Simanek, Physics professor at Lock Haven University of Pennsylvania asserts, Too often speculative and tentative hypotheses of cutting edge science are treated as if they were scientific truths, and so accepted by a public eager for answers, ignorant of the fact that As science progresses from ignorance to understanding it must pass through a transitionary phase of confusion and uncertainty.
The media also play a role in the creation and propagation of controversies and the view that certain fields of science are controversial. In "Optimising Public Understanding of Science: A Comparative Perspective" by Jan Nolin et al., the authors claim that From a media perspective it is evident that controversial science sells, not only because of its dramatic value but also since it is often connected to high-stake societal issues.
See also
References
- Controversial Science: From Content to Contention by Thomas Brante et al.
- Communicating uncertainty: Media coverage of new and controversial science by Sharon Dunwoody et al.