Proof we can trust scientists?

Question

I need some arguments for a debate, I will be arguing that scientists CAN be trusted. Even small points could help.

Answer 1

Ethical scientists can be trusted, and can be identified as they publish their findings, their methods, and their conclusions to the general community for scrutiny by their peers. They invite duplication of their experiments, and validation of their methods. They expose their work, and invite constructive criticism and added innovation. They even look for ways to eliminate their own unintentional bias using blind tests and statistical validation.

Can you imagine any other general discipline having the same ethics? Politics, Religion, and Business would never be the same.

Answer 2

In spite of some dodgy scientists (after all, they're human too), you can trust science because it never pretends to be "ultimate truth", it can always be intelligently questioned, and in fact functions by being challenged. That's how the dodgy scientists are exposed, and science itself moves onward - unlike religions, for instance, which may be endlessly argued over and challenged but can never be disproved because they can't be "proved' in the first place. So science adds to both knowledge and insight, frequently feeding interconnections, and is a potentially endless journey - in contrast to doctrines established in ignorance centuries ago and basically unchanged, merely fragmented, by debate and division.

Answer 3

People trust scientist at almost every moment of their lives. Think of a few scenarios:

Going up in an elevator
Applying the brakes of a car to keep from colliding
Taking meds to get healthy
Taking vitamins to keep from getting sick
Wearing clothes to regulate body temp
Wearing glasses to see better
Using electricity to have lights to read by at night

Either physics or biology are rooted in our most basic daily experiences, so everyone trusts science--the question becomes to what degree should we?

Answer 4

Yes, Scientists, Unlike Religious Leaders, Submit there Findings for Scrutiny, By other Scientists. Therefore Open to Fallibility.

Answer 5

Are you absolutely sure you want to use the word "trust?" Seems this would somewhat narrow the scope of your debate. Trust TO--what? To have integrity in their research, to be moral, to be truthful about their findings, to have the expertise necessary, to have the best interests of the planet & it's inhabitants?
Personally, I'd choose credibility, as you have a vast range to support, reinforce this from past (& present) accomplishments that have benefited, & opened worlds. (Astrophysicists are my favourite.)
Trust could open a lot of challenges, many based on paranoia & lack of information.
I'm simply thinking of what I would anticipate in the use of either of the words. Good luck!

Edit: I just looked at the answers & wanted to email freebird for yet another excellent answer, but no email available.

Answer 6

well depends if they worked for the government they tell the truth to them and tell us a hoax.how many new weapons had ever been reveal to us peasant?there is so many things like the aliens and hiding some scary virus and say is going to be fine which is not and well a minor of the scientist may be trusted though because some of them actually reveal the truth to us but that is for u all to judge really

Answer 7

Will you be trusting the prayers of believers or the knowledge of scientists to interdict that planet killing asteroid bearing down on us? hmmm, i'd pick the scientists

Answer 8

Everybody can make mistakes. There are basically four kinds of leaders, Political, Religious, Commercial, and Scientific. The first three have good reasons to cover up their mistakes. The latter may do it sometimes, but the very nature of science is learning, so their mistakes are usually admitted.

Answer 9

Logic is truth. You can't necessarily trust scientists, but you can trust science.

Answer 10

Scientists can be trusted because they are the ones that found cures or vacinations for diseases.