Following the debate thread #7-1 | Can storytelling help science get its message more efficiently across in the public sphere? » Simplement correct | Simply correct
What is really important when one tries to counter widespread pseudo-science propaganda? For the public to get the right information and act upon it or for the public to be able to distinguish between reliable sources of information and propagandists? Skeptics and scientists wanting to partake in public debate about health or technologies have been struggling with this dilemma for decades now. And it becomes particularly acute at a time when some pseudo-sciences and modern superstitions are taking really strong holds in our industrialized democracies. Some think that using the same communication strategies as those propagandists, such as personal storytelling, could be a way to regain some of the lost grounds. However, I fear this could lead to an even more serious misunderstanding within the general public of how science works. Plus | More