The concept of "scientific consensus" is widely discussed in the literature on science communication, philosophy of science, and sociology of science. Scientific consensus refers to the collective agreement among scientists in a particular field on the validity of specific theories, findings, or interpretations based on available evidence. Below are some key theories and discussions related to scientific consensus:
Key Literature: Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts
Bruno Latour and Steve Woolgar argue that scientific consensus is not merely the result of discovering "truths" about the natural world but is socially constructed through negotiation, debate, and the practices of scientific communities. Their work emphasizes the role of social and institutional factors in shaping what is accepted as "scientific knowledge."
Key Literature: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
Thomas Kuhn introduced the idea of paradigms—shared frameworks of understanding within scientific communities. He suggests that scientific consensus is achieved within paradigms during periods of "normal science." However, during periods of scientific revolution, paradigms may shift, leading to new consensuses that fundamentally alter scientific understanding.
Key Literature: Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy
Michael Polanyi emphasized the importance of tacit knowledge and the authority of expert communities in determining scientific consensus. He argued that trust in the expertise and peer judgment of scientists plays a central role in establishing consensus.
Key Literature: Science as Social Knowledge: Values and Objectivity in Scientific Inquiry
Helen Longino highlighted the importance of critical discourse and diversity in the scientific community for achieving reliable consensus. She argued that objectivity in science depends on the social structure of scientific inquiry, including the openness to critique and diverse perspectives.
Key Literature: Merchants of Doubt