It is impossible to disagree with Giorgio Parisi’s deeply felt concern (Is it TikTok or global crisis? How the world lost its trust in scientists like me, 25 September). A part of the blame must be shared with schools and universities. During my lifetime (I was born in 1955) the quality of instruction has declined at an accelerating rate. The teaching of natural sciences has lost its former rigour in favour of social science claims that are blatant nonsense, such as the argument that scientific knowledge is not based on observation, hypothesis generation and rigorous testing by the world scientific community, but is “constructed” within the framework of the political and social convictions of scientists.
Those who teach such ideas seem not to be aware that the world community of scientists would soon discard any hypothesis that conflicts with observation. That is why science has made such rapid progress since Galileo ignited the scientific revolution in the 17th century. Those societies that have lagged behind are those that tried to subordinate science to social convictions, including religions and such political dogmas as Marxism, nazism, fascism and similar movements that forbid free, critical thinking. We must go back to the optimism of the Enlightenment and teach the coming generations that whatever humanity knows has become known because of science. Everything else is wishful thinking, and may be so dangerous that it might spell the end of our civilisation.
This, I think, is the most serious evil that saps the foundation of our science-based society. Our society is certainly not the best, but it is the best we have been able to generate. Do not let us allow it to regress because of sheer stupidity.
Prof AM Celâl Şengör
Istanbul Technical University
• As a longtime science publisher, I share Giorgio Parisi’s concern over the growing chasm between scientists and the public. The need to show mistakes, a core part of the scientific method, has become more and more at odds with the publishing process, where scientists are required to tell perfect stories that will satisfy journal editors and peer reviewers. This is not how science really works.
In recent years, researchers in the life sciences have started sharing their work early in the form of “preprints” (unreviewed versions of their research papers), allowing them to tell their own stories. During the pandemic, this early sharing of research became a matter of life and death, and led to thousands of findings being made available as soon as they were ready. Servers such as bioRxiv (pronounced “bio-archive”) and medRxiv grew rapidly to accommodate this new movement, and it has been encouraging to see the trend continuing into other areas of biomedical research.
The movement has created the opportunity to reinvent scientific publishing – an industry worth around $20bn worldwide, mostly in the hands of a few corporate publishers – and put the power back into the hands of researchers. If they take this opportunity, we can move to a world where science is more honest, open and trusted by all.
Damian Pattinson
Executive director, eLife
• Giorgio Parisi is of course absolutely right in recognising the alarming decrease in public trust in science and scientists. But the basic conclusion that he settles on – “In a nutshell, scientists are thought to be part of the elite and, therefore, not trustworthy” – fails to recognise that a well-organised, well-financed, and ruthlessly aggressive campaign against science (regarding not only the efficacy and safety of vaccines but the critical planetary threat of climate change) by rightwing politicians, their donors and their media promoters, intended only to advance their political goals, is largely to account for this decrease. Put simply, large numbers of people no longer trust in science because they’ve been told not to.
Jack Whalen
Oakland, California, US
• Have an opinion on anything you’ve read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.
