Science and technology: should we trust them? – Étienne Klein

Étienne Klein’s lecture in five powerful ideas:

• Science should not be conflated with research
• Science does not tell us what to do with its findings.
• What decisions are we comfortable with fully entrusting to machines?
• Are we able to discuss these issues in a rational way?
• Does technology render science obsolete?

—-

• Science should not be conflated with research

This is, however, what happened in France during the pandemic according to Étienne Klein. Science provides answers through consensus that are hard to contest; but this corpus of knowledge raises questions that we don’t have the answers to. That’s why we do research. When science and research are conflated, doubt—which is an integral part of research—hijacks the very idea of science. This creates widespread confusion, which is incredibly difficult to dispel.

“Science provides good answers to well-formulated questions. These answers can’t be contested based on perceptions, assumptions, or feelings.”  

“Research is the doubt that stems from the fact that we know we don’t know. This doubt comes from knowledge, not from ignorance.”  

• Science doesn’t tell us what we should do with our findings

Science has long been considered the driving force behind progress: we do things because we can. Today, things aren’t so cut and dry. We are overwhelmed with uncertainty. Since we’re no longer able to have discussions based on a fundamental principle—the idea of progress—we have discussions based on our individual values. What should take precedence when making a decision; economic, ecological or philosophical values? These different values are difficult to reconcile, so we tend to hesitate.

 “Nuclear physics can tell us how to make a nuclear reactor; it doesn’t tell us whether we should. That’s up to us to decide.”  

“We act as though our doubts don’t belong to us, but rather come from science itself.”  

• What decisions are we comfortable with fully entrusting to machines?

We might think “well, why not?” when deciding to rely on an app that is essentially a black box to tell us the way home. But is this true for other decisions? In what situations should a human’s judgment be favored over that of an AI? As Étienne Klein sees it, in a democratic society we should be able to collectively organize discussions around how new technologies should be used.

• Are we able to discuss these issues in a rational way?

Nanotechnology, nuclear waste, 5G — these debates are often polarized, even adversarial. For Klein, this is partly because technologies are judged not based on what they are in a real and tangible sense, but rather based on their “ halo effect ”. This does not mean that we all have to become experts on every subject, which would in any case be impossible; instead, we must make the effort to develop an informed opinion. To increase trust, we need to improve the general populace’s scientific knowledge.

“This supposed opposition between scientists and the general public is neither real nor credible. Scientists are part of the general public in many areas, just as soon as they step outside of their field of expertise.”  

• Does technology render science obsolete?

The Enlightenment-era philosophers who wrote the Encyclopédie believed that technology should be a vector for scientific education. Is this a lost cause today? Étienne Klein observes that the more complex a technology is, the easier it is to use it without understanding it. Technology distances us from science by making scientific knowledge non-essential. The physicist describes the impact of this phenomenon; not only on us as members of the public and on our children, but also on the engineering students he works with, who feel out of their depth. But how can we fix this? He gives us one lead, one clue: technology professionals, especially engineers, need to step up to the plate.