Speaking Science - How Scientific Language Translates to Society

 

An essential part of scientific research is the education and communication of significant findings. This can be especially true for sciences that directly affect the general public. However, there is often a disconnect between what a scientist attempts to convey and how the public interprets the information given. A significant portion of this confusion can be attributed to the way that scientists communicate ideas; the way a scientist speaks and writes is almost its own language, with very different connotations for the same phrasing. In order to remedy this, we must either change the way that scientists speak to the public or better educate the public on scientific terminology. 

"Hand Robot Human" by geralt | Pixabay

The way that professionals discuss scientific concepts is very specific and careful. One will never hear a seasoned scientist use words like "fact" or "absolute certainty," because their job, by nature, is to explore uncertainty. Our understanding of the world is always shifting, because with each new discovery comes more and more questions. All of a sudden, what was widely considered to be "fact" has been disproven and our entire outlook shifts. 3,000 years ago we knew the world was flat; 300 years ago we knew that disease was caused by "bad air"; 200 years ago we knew that life had only existed for a few thousand years. Now we know that the earth is a spheroid, that bacteria and viruses cause disease, and that life has existed for millions of years. Even though we are extremely confident in these theories, scientists are aware that absolute certainty is an unattainable standard. This argument is not meant to undercut scientific research--rather, I hope it draws on the importance of continued research--but it does show how important it is to discuss science with some care.

With this in mind, scientists use very specific and well-defined terminology when discussing their observations and concepts. Terms such as "hypothesis" and "theory" are among those most commonly confused in general conversation. The true definition of "hypothesis" is a proposed explanation for a testable phenomenon. However, most people in the general public use "hypothesis" as a term for an educated guess, whether or not it can or will be tested. Even more frequently misused is the term "theory," as most people use it in the same context as "hypothesis," but this term is even more nuanced. In order for an idea to become a theory, it must be rigorously tested to the point that it is widely accepted to be true. This miscommunication leads many in the general public to believe that science is "bogus" because scientists never give them a definite answer when, in reality, scientists are using the most confident language they can. 

If scientists cannot change the way that they convey concepts and ideas, then we must change the way that the public interprets them. This means bettering scientific education from its beginnings and changing the scientific narrative. The true definitions of these words are not in question, as their true definitions are the same as their scientific definitions. The problem is the difference in connotation. If we change the way we view science and the way we use these words, we can improve public understanding and take one step closer to a better, more educated world.