Discussions related to science and technology can be controversial, such as the public conversation surrounding climate science Or gene-editing tools,
This may give the impression that it is better to avoid such conversations. But it is important to have constructive conversations about scientific and technological topics because of how they impact our lives.
Not having these conversations can lead to relationships becoming even more divided and strained. Avoiding such conversations could also have serious implications for scientific research support such as the continued development of life-saving vaccines or deciding how we regulate emerging technologies such as Generative Artificial Intelligence.
Read more:
Generative AI like ChatGPT reveals deep-seated systemic issues beyond the tech industry
The ancient Greeks had a word for those qualitative measures of opportune moments or times where things seem right for an action. he called them karotic, Word kairos is a qualitative measure of time, in contrast to chronosOr linear quantized time.
this is a karotic It’s time to talk about trust – which we may think is a very old idea but is extremely important today – as we see new science emerging and technologies rapidly evolving.
polarization of information
Side effects of allowing issues in science and technology to become so polarized that we don’t talk about them include economic impactCanada is lagging behind in applied and basic scientific research And Responsible technology development,
We need to have straight conversations about scientific research, progress, expert and expertiseand new technologies that may be extremely important society in the future,
together we have built a research network called faith At the University of Waterloo.
Our Inaugural Lecture Series Program This started a conversation about trust in science, technology and health in Canada, and we hope to continue these conversations through the ongoing speaker series and collaborations with other researchers and organizations.
(University of Waterloo), Provided by author (no reuse)
our work demands hard Questions about why people trust science and technology – or don’t, one who is found trustworthyHow trust is earned and lost and how we can have conversations about science and technology in the service of us all.
By doing so, we hope to start a conversation about these topics, not provide definitive answers or tell anyone what to think.
Crisis of confidence?
Although there appears to be a public crisis regarding trust, there is a lot of complexity when we talk about the concept of trust and who is trustworthy. Trust in scientists and interest in science have remained high for many years, but there are some trends that raise questions about whether this is changing.
Overall, have faith medical doctors and scientistsFor example, it appears to have declined somewhat since the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, when confidence was somewhat higher than normal.
Polls and surveys provide us with high-level insights, but we also know that there are issues that become controversial. We also know how the questions asked in a survey or referendum can affect the nature of the responses. For example, if we ask “Do you trust scientists,” are you thinking of scientists in general or are you thinking of a specific scientist?
Sometimes controversy arisesAs in the case Climate change Where the prevailing consensus among scientists was given less strategic importance. sometimes the way we make a point Confusion and mistrust may arise.
Once an issue becomes controversial it can also polarize polarizing language It can affect the way we think and talk about issues.
And of course, social media influence how scientific knowledge is shared, distorted, “Irony reversed”, exploited And Revised – Or not.
(Shutterstock)
communicating through disagreement
How do we talk to each other when we can’t agree?
First of all, to do this job you must have the capacity for emotional and negotiation skills, and some knowledge and interest in a subject.
Listening is a good place to start, and by this we mean really trying to hear and understand someone’s point of view. You may not agree, but you can’t include their ideas if you’re talking, for example. If Something actually happened and someone else is speculating About this What happened.
This may seem like a subtle difference, but these are important differences. In field of rhetoricWe can talk about it as a problem stagnation: You’re asking a question about whether something is a fact and someone else is talking about a definition they’ve already accepted as a fact.
Listening means working hard to determine what someone else is talking about and while you may still disagree, cite misinformation or otherwise challenge points, you should do so empathetically and respectfully. should do. We can work towards building bridges that will meaningfully advance the conversation.
There’s a certain amount of respect inherent in this for the person you’re talking to – even if you are an expertYou need Nature Which means character built on goodwill (eunuia), good morals (Arete) and good sense or reason (phronesis) – and also the goodwill to understand their point of view.
However, goodwill goes both ways. If the person you’re listening to isn’t approaching the conversation with goodwill or goodwill, it may be time to forgive yourself.
Read more:
US Capitol violence could happen in Canada – here are 3 ways to prevent it
better science, better technology
We turn to scientists, engineers, and other experts to improve our ethical processes for science development and deployment, and how we engage in conversations about how these efforts should shape our communities and everyday lives. There is a need to work from.
Developing strategies to talk about our research methods and how the science works and, critically, listening to people’s concerns are the first steps. Communicating science responsibly and ethically, This is a step experts can take with family, friends, and their communities. Working to support knowledge sharing from a variety of experts that better reflects the range of people and experiences in our communities is also vital.
Because trust requires some form of vulnerability, the credibility of experts is important in science and technology.
The relationship between experts and non-experts is asymmetrical. Experts often have the knowledge that others need, and others must trust that the expert will provide that knowledge and will do so with goodwill, good understanding, and good judgment consistent with shared values. When it is perceived that this is not happening, trust may diminish or disappear.
Trust itself is important for the progress of science and science is important for the progress of society.