- #1
Dembadon
Gold Member
- 659
- 89
Discussing scientific matters with people who've no background in science presents many challenges and have been discussed on this forum many times throughout the past. Helpful resources do exist. For example, @Ryan_m_b posted a great link a few years ago that gives some general guidelines on how one should approach a research paper:
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/how-to-read-a-scientific-paper.707591/
This method will not be effective for everyone, but I think it serves as a great starting point for the general public.
I was recently involved in a discussion about delayed vaccination schedules with some family members. I've often found these situations difficult, because when I ask where they are getting their information, most of the time the sources they provide are not up to my standards. I think it's very important to establish why they believe what they believe, and asking how they came to their conclusion(s) is a key factor.
It is worth noting that an important assumption must be made: The person values science. If this condition is not met, then conversations usually involve conspiracy theories and/or quackery. I typically do not entertain willful ignorance or intellectual laziness. However, I feel a personal conviction to do my best in helping someone who has an honest interest in critical thinking arrive at a more rational conclusion.
A couple of the family members in the discussion do not value scientific evidence, unfortunately, due to bad experiences in their past. As much as I'd like to help them, if they do not trust scientists, then a discussion with them is not likely to be productive. If their counter-argument is always, "Well I just don't trust the science," then giving them scientific evidence is pointless, and becomes an off-topic discussion of science vs. personal feelings and anecdotes. One of the family members, however, has asked for my sources and has expressed an honest willingness to hear the current scientific consensus on the issue.
Here's my problem: I typically read primary research articles. For someone without a background in science, these can be a bit overwhelming and contain concepts or methods that are difficult for them to scrutinize.
Review articles are usually more approachable but are not always available for a given topic, or they're too old.
My hopes for the thread: I would like some input and resources from the PF community who've experienced a similar situation (it does not have to involve delayed vaccination schedules, but it's the reason I've started the thread). I would like to get some advice on where to go (resources that are reputable and approachable by the general population), as well as what you did in the situation that seemed to help.
Given the sensitive nature of the subject (parenting decisions), please try to keep value judgments civil. It might be difficult to do with this subject since it involves public health and its importance for the population as a whole. However, it's important to focus on the argument, not the person. Being critical is fine, but I don't want people ascribing malice to a certain viewpoint. This usually sends the discussion to the point of no return, the destination of which is the locked thread bucket. :)
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/how-to-read-a-scientific-paper.707591/
This method will not be effective for everyone, but I think it serves as a great starting point for the general public.
I was recently involved in a discussion about delayed vaccination schedules with some family members. I've often found these situations difficult, because when I ask where they are getting their information, most of the time the sources they provide are not up to my standards. I think it's very important to establish why they believe what they believe, and asking how they came to their conclusion(s) is a key factor.
It is worth noting that an important assumption must be made: The person values science. If this condition is not met, then conversations usually involve conspiracy theories and/or quackery. I typically do not entertain willful ignorance or intellectual laziness. However, I feel a personal conviction to do my best in helping someone who has an honest interest in critical thinking arrive at a more rational conclusion.
A couple of the family members in the discussion do not value scientific evidence, unfortunately, due to bad experiences in their past. As much as I'd like to help them, if they do not trust scientists, then a discussion with them is not likely to be productive. If their counter-argument is always, "Well I just don't trust the science," then giving them scientific evidence is pointless, and becomes an off-topic discussion of science vs. personal feelings and anecdotes. One of the family members, however, has asked for my sources and has expressed an honest willingness to hear the current scientific consensus on the issue.
Here's my problem: I typically read primary research articles. For someone without a background in science, these can be a bit overwhelming and contain concepts or methods that are difficult for them to scrutinize.
Review articles are usually more approachable but are not always available for a given topic, or they're too old.
My hopes for the thread: I would like some input and resources from the PF community who've experienced a similar situation (it does not have to involve delayed vaccination schedules, but it's the reason I've started the thread). I would like to get some advice on where to go (resources that are reputable and approachable by the general population), as well as what you did in the situation that seemed to help.
Given the sensitive nature of the subject (parenting decisions), please try to keep value judgments civil. It might be difficult to do with this subject since it involves public health and its importance for the population as a whole. However, it's important to focus on the argument, not the person. Being critical is fine, but I don't want people ascribing malice to a certain viewpoint. This usually sends the discussion to the point of no return, the destination of which is the locked thread bucket. :)