Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> Science isn’t about being right every time, or even most of the time. It is about being more right over time and fixing what it got wrong. So how is a common citizen supposed to know when science is “done” and when it is halfway to done which is the same as being wrong?

This is asking the wrong question. A cost-benefit analysis needs to be done, when weighing scientific claims to act on, not just saying "this is right" or "this is wrong". If scientists are pretty sure that me eating an apple (for instance) is a good thing, it costs me little in exchange for a decent potential benefit.

This is why a scientifically literate populace is so incredibly important; without it, you get this all-or-nothing hogwash that this article makes out to be a good thing, for whatever reason.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: