Why Trust Science?

Why Trust Science? examines the foundations and processes that make science a reliable source of knowledge. Drawing from historical cases and philosophical arguments, Naomi Oreskes explores how scientific consensus emerges and why it matters. Through analysis of scientific controversies and public debates, the book traces how different groups have questioned or defended scientific authority over time. Oreskes investigates key examples including climate change, nuclear physics, and public health policies. Scientists, philosophers, historians and other experts contribute responses to Oreskes' core arguments about scientific credibility and consensus. Their perspectives add layers of discussion about how science operates in practice and theory. The book poses fundamental questions about expertise, evidence, and trust in modern society while highlighting the social nature of scientific knowledge production. This work speaks to contemporary debates about facts, truth and the role of science in public discourse.

Readers appreciate Oreskes' examination of scientific consensus and her historical examples that demonstrate how science self-corrects over time. Many note the book's relevance to current debates about climate change, vaccines, and public trust in scientific institutions. Favorable reviews highlight: - Clear explanation of peer review processes - Strong examples from medical history - Balanced treatment of science skepticism Common criticisms: - Too much focus on feminist philosophy - Repetitive arguments - Limited discussion of practical solutions - Academic writing style that some find dense One reader noted: "She spends too much time defending science against postmodernist critiques from the 1990s." Ratings: Goodreads: 3.9/5 (245 ratings) Amazon: 4.3/5 (108 ratings) Many academic journals gave positive reviews, while general readers were more divided. Several reviewers mentioned the book works better for academic audiences than general readers seeking practical guidance on evaluating scientific claims.

The Death of Expertise by Tom Nichols This book examines how the rejection of expertise and traditional sources of knowledge threatens the foundations of an informed democracy.

Science in the Soul by Richard Dawkins The text presents a defense of scientific thinking and empirical evidence as the basis for understanding reality and making decisions.

The Demon-Haunted World by Carl Sagan The work outlines tools for skeptical thinking and explains the methods of science as an antidote to pseudoscience and superstition.

Merchants of Doubt by Naomi Oreskes, Erik M. Conway The investigation reveals how organized groups have used skepticism to undermine scientific findings on topics from tobacco to climate change.

The Knowledge Machine by Michael Strevens The book explains how the scientific method developed and why it remains the most reliable system for generating knowledge about the world.

🔬 Author Naomi Oreskes initially trained as a mining geologist before becoming a renowned historian of science at Harvard University. 🌍 The book emerged from the Tanner Lectures on Human Values that Oreskes delivered at Princeton University in 2016, expanded with responses from other scholars. 📚 The work examines five major scientific controversies, including continental drift theory and the discovery that smoking causes cancer, to demonstrate how scientific consensus emerges. 🎯 Oreskes coined the term "scientific consensus" in her 2004 paper studying climate change literature, which became one of the most widely cited works on the topic. ⚡ The book challenges the common belief that science is purely objective, arguing instead that social factors and diversity in scientific communities actually strengthen scientific conclusions rather than weaken them.