The stigma against science in modern politics threatens the American democratic process, and it is necessary to reform public perception of scientific issues such as climate change, author and filmmaker Shawn Lawrence Otto said in a Monday lecture at the Class of 1978 Life Sciences Center.
Once viewed as a source of national pride, science has become a "discomforting" topic in current politics, he said in his lecture titled "Scientists, the Media and Politicians in the Climate Change Debate," which drew ideas from his newest book "Fool Me Twice: Fighting the Assault on Science in America."
During the 2007 Hollywood writers' strike, Otto, who is also a screenwriter, co-founded "Science Debate 2008," an initiative aimed at organizing a presidential debate to discuss science-related policies before the 2008 election, he said.
"Virtually none of the presidential candidates were talking about science, and even though over 30,000 scientists signed onto our campaign, we couldn't get much media coverage or response from candidates," he said. "This was very curious to me and made me ask, What has happened today where science has become such a taboo topic to talk about?'"
Otto said that science must be considered in addressing future policy challenges because of the fast pace of information discovery, and science plays a critical role in contributing to democratic ideals.
"Because of the vast growth of scientists all over the world and the great interconnectivity that exists, we're going to create as much knowledge in the next 40 years as we did in the last 400 years," Otto said. "Science, freedom, authoritarianism and democracy these are the ideas that are important to who we are."
One major reason for which science is often dismissed in public dialogue is because it is difficult for most people to understand "invisible things," according to Otto.
"The idea of quantum mechanics, for example, is roughly equivalent in the public's view of magic," Otto said, pointing to a picture of Harry Potter. "Because people cannot explain how many scientific processes works, society has turned science into a belief issue more than a knowledge issue."
Climate change, for example, has fallen victim to the problem of "invisibility," Otto said, citing popular political movements that deny climate change, as well as Republican presidential candidates who state factually incorrect information about global warming. Participants of and listeners to such ideas believe they are being told true information, he said.
"When we talk about products, especially when pitching to Congress, we sell the commodity of knowledge we're creating," he said. "We leave out the process and the concrete argument, and this makes it difficult for voters. People really believe what they are told. This is dangerous to democracy because there's a large segment of the population that believe what they see."
Science has never been a partisan issue, but is a fundamentally political one, according to Otto. Science is anti-authoritative and neither conservative nor progressive, he said.
Otto said that many politicians attempt to make reasoned arguments about scientific issues such as climate change but do not possess a great deal of knowledge about the issue.
"What happens to democracy in a world dominated by complex science that the majority of people just do not really understand?" Otto asked the audience.
In order to reverse this culture of "emotion-based" arguments about science, Otto said it is necessary to rapidly confront and debunk science that is "spinned."
Otto said that once people begin to emphasize the process of science and not the product, concepts can be made into concrete ideas, and people will be able to be involved in the thought process and think for themselves.
"Science is a humanitarian cause that values independent judgment, is tolerant and open to the free flow of information and is democratic by nature," Otto said. "We need to protect science and advocate for it."
The lecture was co-sponsored by the environmental studies department, the biology department and the graduate student councils, and it was part of the "Communication Street Fight" series.
