Honesty is a virtue

The single most important virtue in science is honesty. Few other disciplines come close to having the simple, innate requirement of truthful reporting as scientific research. It is painful to admit that the strongest point of science may also be its greatest weakness. How can honest science compete in a world where the truth is what people believe?

I first need to justify my claim that science is one of the most honest professional disciplines. I see a scientific approach as the filter which sieves the reliable information out of our sensory experience, and uses that information to construct models of the world which explain our physical reality. It is unparalleled in its success as an approach for understanding the world we live in. As we gather more information, poor explanations and falsehoods are superseded or discarded and the accuracy of our knowledge improves. It’s not a smooth process in the short term, but if you jump through any 20 or 30 year period in the last few centuries, there will always be areas in which our scientific understanding has moved forward.

The ultimate aim of scientific research is, therefore, to improve our understanding of reality. If scientists aren’t honest about the observations they’re making, the models they create and the conclusions they draw, then the resulting knowledge is wrong. This defeats the entire purpose of scientific research, and when it occurs, it can create messy tangles, ruin careers and waste large amounts of time!

Trust me...

However, scientists are only human, so bad or sloppy science is inevitable. Most scientific research is not scrutinised at the data collection and processing level; the final, published results are where critical evaluation takes place. Transparency is increasing, but there are many areas where an unscrupulous scientist could make unnoticed changes. Therefore, bad science can be perpetuated in a dishonest or careless environment, and the self-correction, when it comes, will be more severe the longer the poor practice goes on.

Therefore, scientists are hammered with three golden rules – do not fabricate, dishonestly modify, or misrepresent (including by omission) results (plagiarism is up there too). It seems to be a simple standard, but most other trades don’t have so much to gain or lose based on the integrity of the practitioners. Scientists value intellectual honesty as a high virtue, and breach of the implicit trust in honesty throughout the scientific process is viewed as one of the worst crimes in the profession. Seeing that ideal in practice over the past few years, and experiencing firsthand the difficulties that arise when complete honesty isn’t observed in research, I find myself with a high level of trust in scientists and the process of science in general.

That’s reflected in public perception, too: Australians see science as a trustworthy profession. It’s not as high as the valiant public services, but ranking close to teachers, dentists and childcare providers is good company. Commercially, invoking ‘science’ as a testing method, or claiming a product is ‘scientifically proven’ is a gold (or minimum?) standard for building product reputation.

This may sound like a scientist talking up his discipline, but later in the week I’ll be expanding on this idea, because I think honesty has been one of the discipline’s greatest weaknesses in recent years. The scientific obsession with caveats, uncertainty and erring on the side of caution have allowed critics or opponents of science and its findings to twist, spin and misrepresent the nature of science, actual scientific findings, and the motivations and integrity of scientists. A process like IPCC reporting, which is inherently conservative, is pilloried by opponents as alarmist, and outspoken biologists supporting evolutionary theory are criticised for being too harsh about religion while fundamentalists accuse them of conspiracy.

How has the present situation come about, and where does that leave science as a profession? Is it even a problem? I don’t claim to have answers to such tough questions, but it won’t stop me tapping my thoughts out into the electronic world!

Advertisements
Categories: Problems, Science, Thoughts | Tags: , | 6 Comments

Post navigation

6 thoughts on “Honesty is a virtue

  1. Nice write up!
    I’ve also been thinking about this a lot recently; that truth and integrity are both the strength and weakness of science, which has been excellently illustrated in the recent attacks on climate science.
    Truth certainly has it’s limitations from an ideological view point and integrity tends to make scientific approach rather predictable (one of the reasons we can trust much of the scientific basis).
    Cheers,
    Tim

    • Thanks Tim, I am hoping to get a chance to write up the followup where I sort out my thoughts about the ‘cons’ side of things. I often find I get into writing a post like this, with ideas overflowing about what to write, only to realise just how tricky and tangled the issues are! So hopefully I can remain coherent… and I look forward to seeing if your thinking translates to some graphic art!

  2. Chris

    This is indeed a difficult issue. Were science to compromise it’s honesty for some ‘greater good’ i,e. convincing idiots that climate change is a reality and we need to act both locally and globally to limit the extreme consequences, wouldn’t science then lose it’s greatest asset, which is it’s credibility. People still trust science and scientific research more than politicians and those with something to sell. Maybe promoting science and it’s truths the way commercial operators promote their products is the way to go…but where does the money come from?

    • Exactly, it’s interesting that science advocacy is relatively low considering the scale of the enterprise. I guess the difference is that much of science is externally funded, privately or publicly, so their budgets don’t necessarily include a cut to go to PR or lobbying in the public sphere. By contrast industries with common interests can fund intense promotion of their product or protection of their interests.

      Hrm….

  3. Troy

    I would rather tell someone i’m hiv+ upfront up front .I’ve had hiv over 25 yrs and most people are fine when I’m honest with them so they know how to protect themselves.With China India and Russia being on the the verge of an AIDS catastrophy it’s feels good to know your telling the truth.That give’s people to make the choice which I didn’t have.

  4. Hello! I just want to give a huge thumbs up for the nice data you will have here on this post. I can be coming again to your weblog for more soon.

Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: