Why Trust Science?

March 9, 2025

First Aired: January 22, 2023

Listen

According to a recent survey conducted by the Pew Research Center, the number of Americans who trust in science is steadily declining. While politicization is partly to blame, another reason may be that the “truths” of science seem to shift endlessly. So why should we trust science? Is it still reliable, even if it doesn’t seem to settle on a single truth? And what can be done to increase the general public’s confidence in medicine, climate research, or statistics? Josh and Ray rely on Ann Thresher from Stanford University, co-author of The Tangle of Science: Reliability Beyond Method, Rigour, and Objectivity.

Ray and Josh begin the show by questioning if the truth about the world can be achieved through science and furthermore, if we can know that we have achieved it. Given history’s longstanding series of errors, corrections, and theories, the question “Why trust science?” appears more difficult than we might initially think.

Ray and Josh welcome the show’s guest, Ann Thresher, a science ethicist at Stanford University and co-author of “The Tangle of Science: Reliability Beyond Method, Rigor, and Objectivity.” Ann states that science should not necessarily be trusted because it is wholly true, but rather because it is reliable. Although science can sometimes be false, we often find that its laws are useful for everyday application or at the very least one contextual piece of an incomplete picture. Should the purpose of science be engineering and fulfilling human aims, then reliability is indeed an important feature.

In the last segment of the show, Ann touches on the recent Covid-19 pandemic which greatly increased science denialism. She notes the relation between truth and reliability, revisiting earlier points about applications of science despite its shortcomings and how science can be redeemed through this lens.

Roving Philosophical Report (3:56): Holly J. McDede reports on the heroin epidemic and its proposed solutions of safe injection sites, distribution of overdose-reversal drugs, and similar programs. This examples highlights one form of harm reduction backed by science yet hesitatingly accepted or outrightly denied by politicians and public figures.
Sixty-Second Philosopher (45:50): Ian Shoales reports on the evolution of scientific knowledge, methodology, and tools. Moreover, he discusses how culture plays a significant role in fueling the scientific questions we ask and responses we give.