which of the following is not a reason that controversies exist in science? course hero

Is there a scientific controversy between scientific and non-scientific ideas?

Controversies between scientific and non-scientific ideas are not within the realm of science and are not true scientific controversies. This science article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

Why is there so much controversy in science?

Science is also full of controversy. Similar to the controversy over offshore drilling, scientists appeal to evidence to support their claims, and the nature of the debate changes as new evidence comes to light. But there are some key differences between a scientific controversy and other types of controversy.

Who decides what is the right answer in a scientific controversy?

There is no authoritative body in science that decides what the right answer in a controversy is, nor does it require complete consensus among all scientists. The resolution to a controversy comes when one argument is widely accepted and other arguments fade away.

Is controversy a sign of Health in scientific endeavor?

In most cases, controversy is a sign of health in the scientific endeavor, and the more people that are involved in the controversy, conducting research to address the issues, the more rapidly progress is made.

Why are controversies important in science?

Why is there a challenge in identifying scientific controversies appropriate for teaching?

What are the different types of controversy?

How can a controversy be distinguished from a disagreement?

Why are scientific controversies risky?

What are some examples of controversy in science?

Is Springer Nature neutral?

See 4 more

About this website

5 legitimate scientific controversies | The Week

3. Is red wine really good for your health or not? Oenophiles cried vive le vin! when studies in the 2000s suggested that resveratrol, an antioxidant compound in grape skin and chocolate, was the ...

Top Genuine Controversies in Science - Big Think

There is often disagreement between what the public considers controversial and what scientists consider controversial.

The 6 Most Controversial Issues All Across America

The The Second Amendment to US Constitution gives its citizens the right to possess arms for self-defense, but 66.9% of all homicide cases involve the use of firearms (according to the UNODC).

Why are controversies important in science?

Controversies in science are an essential feature of scientific practice: defined here as current problems that are unresolved because there are no accepted procedures by which they can be resolved or there are differing assumptions that affect the interpretation of evidence . Although there has been much attention in science education literature addressing socio-scientific and historical controversies in science, less has been paid to the teaching of contemporary scientific controversies. Using semi-structured qualitative interviews with 18 teachers at different career stages in England, we investigated teachers’ social representations of scientific controversies using the discourse of the collective subject (DSC). We found a lack of controversy in teachers’ responses. Whilst scientific controversies were seen as an essential feature of how science works, they were not viewed as essential in science education and were represented as a distraction and dealt with informally, outside the planned curriculum and in response to students’ questions. Subject knowledge was considered a barrier. We argue that teaching about carefully selected scientific controversies has the potential to contribute to teachers’ and students’ understandings of science and the nature of science. There are perceived to be few opportunities for teachers to exercise this in the English context. We suggest how the collective subject discourses might be used to open up a discussion about teaching controversies in professional learning situations. Materials to stimulate discussion of scientific controversies could be useful in future curriculum development in science, but these would need to address the barriers of subject knowledge, access to literature and conflict with assessment-related priorities and a perceived need to advocate for trust in science.

Why is there a challenge in identifying scientific controversies appropriate for teaching?

There is a challenge in identifying scientific controversies appropriate for teaching because these are often inaccessible to the layperson, being played out at conferences, in the review of journal articles and in private communications (Harker 2015 ), and also because they relate to contemporary science that has not yet made it into the curriculum.

What are the different types of controversy?

In her analysis of the theory of relativity in the 1920s, Wazeck ( 2013) identified different types of controversy in relation to science: those in science, those about science and the third type of controversy that relates to disagreements about the nature of science . Controversies in science are controversies between scientists in which there is disagreement about a knowledge claim (Wazeck 2013 ). In these epistemological controversies, scientists share a common understanding of the nature of a problem such that the controversy can be resolved in science, but there may be disagreement over the most promising questions, methods or criteria for resolving the controversy. Recent high-profile controversies in science have included whether or not neurogenesis occurs throughout human life (Lee and Thuret 2018 ), whether or not neutrinos can travel faster than the speed of light (Cartwright 2018) and the composition of group three in the periodic table (Ball 2017; Scerri 2012 ). Actors in these epistemic controversies tend to be predominantly scientists.

How can a controversy be distinguished from a disagreement?

That is to say, there must be argument and counterargument on both sides , and this must be expressed in oral or written form so that others can arrive at their own position. Dascal has argued that these controversies are central to any account of the history of ideas in science, in which they represent the ‘natural state of science...the locus where critical activity - essential for science - is exercised’ (Dascal 1998, p. 153).

Why are scientific controversies risky?

Scientific controversies were represented as risky because they present a challenge to students’ trust in science. On the contrary, we see controversies in science as a way of introducing how science works to students, through which they can come to understand features of science such as reproducibility, inquiry and refutation. Through a better understanding of what science is able to do, and to the limits of scientific certainty, students will be better prepared to assess purported claims in the media. Related to this, in dealing with controversies, teachers represented balance as both achievable and desirable with the representation that teachers must not share their own views. These issues are acute when dealing with controversies about science. In the case of controversies in science, there is unlikely to be a strong emotional investment (from teachers or students) in the resolution of the controversy as the competing claims do not extend to the social, ethical and economic realm. In scientific controversies, resolution instead relies on identifying assumptions and generating scientific questions and lines of enquiry, which have educational value, particularly in their contribution to ‘authentic’ science education.

What are some examples of controversy in science?

The example provided by Wazseck is the controversy about the theory of relativity, in which Einstein’s ideas were opposed by those who ‘shared an understanding of science as something clear and understandable and targeted at ‘truth’, to which modern physics formed the counterpart’ (p. 184). That is, the theory of relativity was seen as controversial because it was perceived to change the relationship between science, truth and reality.

Is Springer Nature neutral?

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Why is controversy important in science?

In contrast, a controversy in science often creates progress because it spurs new research and therefore is an essential part of the process of science.

How do controversy causes progress in science?

Controversies cause progress in science by encouraging research on the topic in question.

What is scientific controversy?

A true scientific controversy involves a sustained debate within the broader scientific community (McMullin, 1987). In other words, a significant number of people must be actively engaged in research that addresses the controversy over time. No matter what the content of the disagreement, the scientists involved all share some fundamental knowledge and agree that the subject matter is worth being concerned about and that the various arguments are legitimate.

How does climate affect the sea surface?

Sea surface temperature is one manifestation of climate. As global climate changes, the distribution of warmer and colder waters on the sea surface also changes . Tor Bergeron, another member of the Bergen group, went beyond thinking about how sea surface temperature changes annually and considered what happened over longer periods of time, placing hurricanes in the context of long-term climate changes. In a review paper in 1954, Bergeron speculated that the frequency and intensity of hurricanes, as well as where and when they formed, could have changed dramatically over geologic time with small changes in Earth's orbit and solar intensity – both of which affect global climate (Bergeron, 1954). He urged scientists who studied climate in the past to keep that in mind. At the time, however, the techniques available to assess past climate to the level of detail of individual hurricanes simply didn't exist, and few scientists took up the challenge.

How does a controversy become part of the scientific literature?

Though controversies are often discussed in informal settings (the same way you might discuss a controversial issue with your friends), the real debate is carried out at research meetings and through the publication of journal articles (see our Scientific Journal Articles module). It is only through this process that the debate becomes part of the scientific literature (see our Utilizing the Scientific Literature module) and helps science progress. There is no authoritative body in science that decides what the right answer in a controversy is, nor does it require complete consensus among all scientists. The resolution to a controversy comes when one argument is widely accepted and other arguments fade away. Often, the evidence in favor of one side of the controversy becomes so overwhelming that people simply stop arguing about it. Usually, that happens when multiple lines of evidence coming from multiple research methods (and perhaps multiple disciplines) all converge.

Is controversy a bad thing?

Controversy isn't always a bad thing. It exists in every field of science and in many cases clarifies and advances our scientific understanding. This module explains what scientific controversies are and how they differ from other kinds of controversy. Using the example of climate change, the module identifies factors that lead to controversies in science and explains how they are resolved.

Is a string theory controversy a controversy?

Two scientists disagreeing over an instrument or string theory – or even the interpretation of data – does not count as a controversy, however. A true scientific controversy involves a sustained debate within the broader scientific community (McMullin, 1987).

What is a Scientific Controversy?

The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines controversy as “a discussion marked especially by the expression of opposing views.” So, what does it mean for something to be a “scientific” controversy?

What are some examples of laws that deal with phenomena that are not directly observable?

Other laws deal with phenomena that are not directly observable. For example, the second law of thermodynamics deals with entropy, which is not directly observable in the same way that volume and pressure are. Still, other laws offer more mechanistic explanations of phenomena. For example, Mendel’s first law offers a model of how genes are distributed to gametes and offspring that help us make predictions about the outcomes of genetic crosses.

How does the scientific community evaluate evidence?

Scientists describe their work at conferences, in journal articles, and in books. By disseminating their ideas, study methods, and test results in these ways, scientists allow other community members to review their work. This helps to ensure:

Why do scientists edit the genomes of animals?

They edit the genomes of animals, like mice and zebrafish, because animals have many of the same genes as humans. For example, mice and humans share about 85 percent of their genes! By changing a single gene or multiple genes in a mouse, scientists can observe how these changes affect the mouse’s health and predict how similar changes in human genomes might affect human health.

What are the elements of science?

Four main elements to science: exploration and discovery, testing ideas, benefits and outcomes, and community analysis and feedback.

When did Wakefield and his research group publish a paper in the Lancet?

The idea of this possible link began by Wakefield and his research group when they published a paper in “The Lancet” journal in 1998 titled “Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children” ( see the original article, which has since been retracted). In the article, Wakefield et al. (1998) claimed that “In eight children, the onset of behavioural problems had been linked, either by the parents or by the child’s physician, with measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination.”

Can bias be eliminated in research?

Although we cannot eliminate bias in research projects, there are ways to mitigate bias. One way is scrutinizing our methods before beginning the research and finding ways to reduce bias (see the exercise below for examples). The scientific community also balances biases.

Why are controversies important in science?

Controversies in science are an essential feature of scientific practice: defined here as current problems that are unresolved because there are no accepted procedures by which they can be resolved or there are differing assumptions that affect the interpretation of evidence . Although there has been much attention in science education literature addressing socio-scientific and historical controversies in science, less has been paid to the teaching of contemporary scientific controversies. Using semi-structured qualitative interviews with 18 teachers at different career stages in England, we investigated teachers’ social representations of scientific controversies using the discourse of the collective subject (DSC). We found a lack of controversy in teachers’ responses. Whilst scientific controversies were seen as an essential feature of how science works, they were not viewed as essential in science education and were represented as a distraction and dealt with informally, outside the planned curriculum and in response to students’ questions. Subject knowledge was considered a barrier. We argue that teaching about carefully selected scientific controversies has the potential to contribute to teachers’ and students’ understandings of science and the nature of science. There are perceived to be few opportunities for teachers to exercise this in the English context. We suggest how the collective subject discourses might be used to open up a discussion about teaching controversies in professional learning situations. Materials to stimulate discussion of scientific controversies could be useful in future curriculum development in science, but these would need to address the barriers of subject knowledge, access to literature and conflict with assessment-related priorities and a perceived need to advocate for trust in science.

Why is there a challenge in identifying scientific controversies appropriate for teaching?

There is a challenge in identifying scientific controversies appropriate for teaching because these are often inaccessible to the layperson, being played out at conferences, in the review of journal articles and in private communications (Harker 2015 ), and also because they relate to contemporary science that has not yet made it into the curriculum.

What are the different types of controversy?

In her analysis of the theory of relativity in the 1920s, Wazeck ( 2013) identified different types of controversy in relation to science: those in science, those about science and the third type of controversy that relates to disagreements about the nature of science . Controversies in science are controversies between scientists in which there is disagreement about a knowledge claim (Wazeck 2013 ). In these epistemological controversies, scientists share a common understanding of the nature of a problem such that the controversy can be resolved in science, but there may be disagreement over the most promising questions, methods or criteria for resolving the controversy. Recent high-profile controversies in science have included whether or not neurogenesis occurs throughout human life (Lee and Thuret 2018 ), whether or not neutrinos can travel faster than the speed of light (Cartwright 2018) and the composition of group three in the periodic table (Ball 2017; Scerri 2012 ). Actors in these epistemic controversies tend to be predominantly scientists.

How can a controversy be distinguished from a disagreement?

That is to say, there must be argument and counterargument on both sides , and this must be expressed in oral or written form so that others can arrive at their own position. Dascal has argued that these controversies are central to any account of the history of ideas in science, in which they represent the ‘natural state of science...the locus where critical activity - essential for science - is exercised’ (Dascal 1998, p. 153).

Why are scientific controversies risky?

Scientific controversies were represented as risky because they present a challenge to students’ trust in science. On the contrary, we see controversies in science as a way of introducing how science works to students, through which they can come to understand features of science such as reproducibility, inquiry and refutation. Through a better understanding of what science is able to do, and to the limits of scientific certainty, students will be better prepared to assess purported claims in the media. Related to this, in dealing with controversies, teachers represented balance as both achievable and desirable with the representation that teachers must not share their own views. These issues are acute when dealing with controversies about science. In the case of controversies in science, there is unlikely to be a strong emotional investment (from teachers or students) in the resolution of the controversy as the competing claims do not extend to the social, ethical and economic realm. In scientific controversies, resolution instead relies on identifying assumptions and generating scientific questions and lines of enquiry, which have educational value, particularly in their contribution to ‘authentic’ science education.

What are some examples of controversy in science?

The example provided by Wazseck is the controversy about the theory of relativity, in which Einstein’s ideas were opposed by those who ‘shared an understanding of science as something clear and understandable and targeted at ‘truth’, to which modern physics formed the counterpart’ (p. 184). That is, the theory of relativity was seen as controversial because it was perceived to change the relationship between science, truth and reality.

Is Springer Nature neutral?

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Overview

Nature of science-related controversies

With science being inconclusive in itself, it leads to a disconnect between individuals. Oftentimes, science gets roped into personal morals and social values which leads to contrasting ideas. This arises the issue of communicating science in an appropriate manner. Listed below, there are some of the various examples of scientific controversies.

The origin of science-related controversies

Conflict with beliefs

See also