[Heartlander]

Are “Hundreds of Thousands of Scientists” Correct?

“The graduate student asked: “Hundreds of thousands of scientists can’t be wrong, can they?” This question may be addressed as follows. First, any argument based on “counting heads” is fallacious. Philosophy professors instruct their students on various fallacies of human thought, one of which is the “fallacy of consensus.” In his book, Fundamentals of Critical Thinking, atheistic philosopher Paul Ricci discussed the “argument from consensus,” and explained its erroneous nature (1986, p. 175). Interestingly, however, in the pages prior to his discussion, Mr. Ricci offered the following as proof of evolution: “The reliability of evolution not only as a theory but as a principle of understanding is not contested by the vast majority of biologists, geologists, astronomers, and other scientists” (1986, p. 172, emp. added).

“Mr. Ricci fell victim to the very fallacy about which he tried to warn his readers—truth is not determined by popular opinion or majority vote.

“Often, scientific successes have occurred because researchers rebelled against the status quo. Sometimes consensual validation must be set aside for the sake of truth. If it is not, those of us who work in science shall become little more than cookie-cutter scientists rushing to fit into a predetermined mold. Nor should we believe that “science” provides the answer to every conceivable question.

To treat science as a secular substitute for God is not only naive, it is idolatry.... Science and technology are the activities of imperfect people. The tendencies to misuse and exploit for personal gain operate here as in every other department of life. But the answer to abuse is not disuse, but responsible use (Poole, 1990, p. 126).

[general_re]

This is, of course, correct. However, it would be equally fallacious to conclude that something were untrue simply because that's what most people think. And the appeal to numbers is something that has to be balanced relatively carefully, in all cases - we are quite right in assigning more weight to the opinions of experts, so long as they are appropriate experts, than to the mass of humanity. But experts are sometimes wrong or mistaken, and consensus opinion is not an indicator of absolute truth, in any case.

Either way, it's not a substitute for your own critical thinking faculties - one must be prepared to examine the evidence in order to arrive at one's own conclusions. Simply relying on what "four out of five dentists" think is not an acceptable reason to set aside your own powers of reason, although it can certainly be a piece of the puzzle that assists you to arrive at a conclusion.