Scientific Populism
Award-winning Israeli psychologists and economists Daniel Kahneman (Nobel Prize in Economics 2002) and Amos Trevsky (MacArthur and Grawemeyer Prizes), in their work Prospect Theory, demonstrate how far the human decision-making mechanism is from being considered “reasonable”.
We like to believe that we are rational beings that we decide based on facts and data yet research has proven multiple times throughout the years that this is nothing but an illusion.
Where People Spend their Money
An extensive survey conducted between 1999 and 2001 revealed some very interesting facts about where the most money is spent. As you will see in the following list, none of the following areas concern measurable or directly practical industries.
One might have expected that the pharmaceutical industry, fuel, or even war or drugs would raise the most money, yet the results of our research refute us.
#1 LUCK
The industry with the highest turnover in the world is the one that deals with luck: astrology, divination, cards, psychics, numerology, etc.
#2 SPIRITUALITY
That has to do with the distant future and the afterlife: religions, mysticism, magic, etc.
#3 GAMBLING
Everything that has to do with the challenge of positive luck: hippodrome, casino, slots, betting, lottery, etc.
#4 SEX
Everything that has to do with our desire for sex: erotic industry, pornography, pimping, “escorts”, etc.
#5 PLEASURE
Everything that has to do with direct entertainment: cinema, show, music, dance, networking, sports, etc.
If we exclude — only partially — the issue of “sex” that stems from our most primitive instincts, no other is a direct surviving factor for human life.
From a logical point of view, it is absurd that we spend most of our money on such matters.
Scientific Populism
From this interest in the “luck” factor, the scientific community has not been left untouched. There are many scientists who make “scientific predictions”.
The problem lies by many in the fact that the prediction of a scientist is often very impactful in making significant decisions by the government and business structures.
At an individual level, many people believe a scientific prediction just as they believe in the zodiac signs. The problem is exactly the same.
Most important of all, “scientific predictions” have the same failure rates as predictions from all other fields!
Why Scientific Populism Succeeded
Let’s examine the elements that made this phenomenon flourish and remain so popular and powerful, as well as the elements that construct it:
1. Scientists with significant recognition and gravitas make a “prediction”. Many of us will think that, for them to state so then it is likely to be valid. This element is known as “authority bias”.
2. The “prediction” is based in part or in full on scientific data, though the interpretation is the impression of the speaker and not part of the respective scientific study.
3. The “prediction” is based on limited scientific data which has not been verified enough times to be considered solid.
4. The “prediction” flirts dangerously with science fiction, the catastrophizing and the emotional state of the listeners. It is addressed to emotion and its purpose is to move, to stir things up, not to convey “confirmed data”.
5. The “prediction” is reproduced from many other sources, articles, reposts, videos, social networks, etc. This makes people believe it more easily. When one distances oneself one can notice that there is no connection between truth and publicity, though when one is emotionally related it is difficult — if not impossible — to discern that the two are not connected in any way.
6. The “prediction” is heard by another talented speaker, known in his own space and is taken as “god’s word” by his own followers (star, presenter, model, businessman, politician.). E.g. a presenter takes an idea that a scientist said about a possible scenario after the coronavirus pandemic and turns it into catchy and dramatic news, in the station’s main bulletin. 20% of the country’s population has been exposed to it, of which 17–25% have believed it unreservedly! In a country like Greece this corresponds to hundreds of thousands of people…
7. The person making the “prediction” has built an important publicity based on it, such as best sellers, lectures, etc. This person has a significant audience (fans, followers) and its size partly determines how rightfully what he says is considered. There may be direct or indirect financial benefits from this publicity after all.
8. The “prediction” has a deterministic form or even a dogmatic character. It offers something similar to the “quick, easy, certain” recipe that characterizes the ideals of the modern commercial arena. It confuses scientific language and scientific evidence with seemingly scientifical language and scientifical evidence. Add to that the arbitrary but scientifically seeming interpretations and you have the ultimate recipe for deception.
The Incentives of Exponents
It is not difficult to understand why people choose to make such “predictions”. The most important incentives are:
• Publicity, which leads to wider recognition, prestige, social elitism and a sense of superiority and importance (value).
• Power over those who believe in prediction and create a polarization around anything that has to do with it.
• Financial benefit, which results from works — usually writing — which follow the lyrical statements, but base their advertising on the publicity gained by the person through it.
• Narcissism and egoism. Scientific elitism and the imposition of theories not through the scientific way, but through the wide acceptance by the public and the media. There is also the term Intellectual Celebrity Syndrome, a form of the more widely known Celebrity Worship Syndrome.
Many scientists possessed by the above tend to publish as many scientific articles (papers & journals) as possible, because it is a general principle that the masses accept anyone who has written more.
Their goal is to have as many posts as possible on the Google Scholars platform and ideally the best search positions.
I do not know if you notice what is happening… Businesses are fighting for dominance in search results because it brings money. It is very strange and dangerous for something similar to happen in the field of scientific research. It fosters and commercializes scientific progress, which is already being monitored and heavily directed by governments, donors and other organized structures.
The Gold Called Future!
Nine out of ten reports that we can characterize as “scientific populism” concern with the future and not the present. They concern with issues and facts that are not possible to verify in the present, for a very good reason; the future!
1. The future fascinates us all. Everyone would like to some extent to be able to see what will happen. The future is a place of possibilities, interest, miracles… The future is illuminated by hope and embellished in such a way that it cannot be done for the present and the past.
2. We cannot deny the future, as it has not yet happened. A prophecy is not a lie, because the time has not yet come to determine whether it is right or wrong, true or false. What better than a product that cannot fail when you sell it?!
You understand the commercial value of the future as a field for anyone who wants to attract interest and attention with the “least possible risk”. Then, how someone will use this attention of the crowd, is another story.
The Dramatic Failure of the Forecasts
There has been a lot of research on whether “predictions” by well-established intellectuals and scientists of our times have a higher “success rate” (if these indeed become a reality) than those of other people.
Reading this article, you may already be suspecting the answer. Nevertheless, if this question was asked to you without you having read the above, you would probably answer differently!
In fact, these individuals (scientists and intellectuals) are hardly more likely to be right in their predictions compared to anyone else…
“But… they usually talk about the field they know… They know something more about the subject… they should be able to better calculate the future…”
All of these thoughts are “reasonable” in a way, yet they do not agree with the scrutiny of predictions made by prominent individuals in recent decades.
So…
A scientific prediction is just as likely to be refuted, similar to any other form of prediction of the future.
And all predictions have little chance of actually coming true!
Epilogue
In this article I made an attempt to demonstrate the problem of “scientific populism”, tackling it from possibly its most extreme expression, “scientific prediction”. Nevertheless, this is not only “scientific populism”, but anything that seems scientific yet is a personal interpretation, etc.
For me and for you, it is often important to take a step back, to challenge what we already know and to try to recognize the logical fallacies and prejudices that we all inevitably fall into.
To evaluate again and again what of what we think we know we really know or believe we know (that is, we believe). To distinguish which decisions are important and not to rely on predictions, especially when they have a literary and emotional charm instead of real logic and statistics, absolute and reliable statements instead of moderate statements…
And to close with a bit of humor:
I predict that a human being will need more than 400 years to be able to correct, on a large scale, the mechanisms of ones thinking and awareness!!!
Do not tell me this did not sound like an amazing prediction!
Reference:
Zairis, A., Stamatis, G. (2020, May 19th.) The different faces of scientific populism, published in HuffPost magazine.
-
Nasos T.
Credits to Andreas Katsimidis and Nikos Ks. for their help in editing