Posts Tagged ‘authority’
Should the existence of an “anti-vax” movement change what scientists can say in publications?
By a bare majority of its Board of Directors, the Cochrane Collaboration, a leading source of trustworthy, systematic reviews of health research, has expelled founding member and director Peter C. Gøtzsche. As always, a tangle of personal, professional and institutional factors are driving the dispute (see [1]-[3]); I’m in no position to comment on most of these. But one focus of controversy is Gøtzsche’s co-authorship of an article in BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine critical of a Cochrane Review of the HPV vaccine, and this raises an important issue in science communication ethics.
Written by jeangoodwin
October 5, 2018 at 11:23 am
Posted in cases
Tagged with authority, ethics, science communication ethics, topoi, trust, War on Science
Morano Analysis #9: Lessons learned
All right! If there are any readers who have followed along this far, maybe it’s now time to draw some dividends from all the work of closely analysis? Going back over all the posts on the Maslin v. Morano exchange, here are some tips & tricks, in case you end up facing off against an advocate like Marc Morano.
Morano Analysis #7: Scientific consensus
This mini-debate between Maslin and Morano first caught my attention because of Morano’s “accusation” that Maslin was using an “appeal to authority,” and Maslin’s assertion of something like a scientific consensus in reply. Claims that the IPCC represents an authoritative “consensus” have been prominent in representations of the IPCC’s reports since the very beginning, and in one of my current projects I’m trying to figure out how consensus claims work (or don’t). The example here, though small, is worth examining closely.
Written by jeangoodwin
March 17, 2010 at 12:38 pm
Posted in discourse analysis
Tagged with arguments, authority, climate change, consensus, Morano, Pielke Principle
Morano Analysis #6: The appeal to authority, by the numbers
I have to feel sorry for Maslin. Once he’s accepted AGW as the central issue in this debate, he’s taken responsibility for presenting evidence of a centuries-long, world-wide, multi-system process. And he’s got about 60 seconds to get the job done. As we’ve seen, he can invite his audience to “look at” the evidence or he can remind them of some vivid event that they’ve already experienced. But the former isn’t going to help him meet his burden of proof now, and the latter is misleading and thus easy for Morano to knock down. The appeal to authority is a third option; can Maslin pull it off?
Written by jeangoodwin
March 15, 2010 at 10:20 am
Posted in discourse analysis
Tagged with arguments, attacks on Science, authority, climate change, Morano