Dick Taverne

As a scientist, I agree with the gist of the book - professional science is just too insular. Even within the community, in my experience there was no platform for junior researchers to engage with the broader issues of their fields, which is something that might be possible once one climbs up in the hierarchy. A colleague of mine was interested in presenting scientific ideas to the general public, but this was done on her own time and without any support from the university, and most scientist do not have energy or inclination for something along those lines.

Also, I have found that once a scientist is no longer employed by a research institution, there is almost no way for him or her to keep up with the field. In this day and age one cannot simply do research independently, and even reading research literature is impossible unless one has access to university servers.

With so much pressure on publishing, and little recognition for anything else done in the course of their work, it is little wonder that scientists see communicating with the public as an annoying distraction and prefer staying in their ivory towers. But the public understanding of science suffers as a result, as well as the quality of research itself.

We talk about having a world of knowledge in our pockets, but we don't really. What we have open access to is a world of opinion, sometimes well-thought out, often wildly fantastic, but we don't all have access to primary data.

If the fundamental problem is persuasion, the solution has been with us all along: rhetoric. It seems to be what the author is driving at and science communicators do well to study it.

I doubt we'll ever reach a time where the masses will be educated enough to be fully *rationally* persuaded of the findings of science. Not just because of right-wing governments obstructing the education of the masses, but also because of the sheer levels of sophistication we've reached in the countless branches of science. Wise science communicators will know their audience. They will pay close attention to the style, delivery and arrangement of their arguments, and they will know when to appeal to their listeners' reason, and when to appeal to their emotions.… (plus d'informations)

Finally someone has taken the time to offer a widely available and robust rebuttal to the nonsense on offer from the organic movement, homeopaths, anti-GM NGOs etc. Traverne does a wonderful job of explaining the role of science in society and how without a clear and consistent framework, reliant upon repeatability and peer review, then we would have no way of determining truth from 'whatever the snake-oil salesman says'. Previously, I had never considered how fundamental the concept of truth and the process for determining fact from 'intuition' was to supporting freedom and democracy - the author labours this point a touch, but it is well made.

This is a superb book.… (plus d'informations)