Third Millennium Thinking: Creating Sense in a World of Nonsense

In this solid if elementary primer, Nobel Prize–winning physicist Perlmutter, UC Berkeley philosopher Campbell (Reference and Consciousness), and Stanford University psychologist MacCoun (Drug War Heresies) equip lay readers with conceptual tools for assessing technical research. Covering common ways that errors creep into scientific studies, the authors note that researchers run the risk of identifying nonexistent or meaningless patterns when working with complex data. For instance, the physicists who discovered the Higgs particle took preemptive action to avoid such misreadings by assessing information from the Large Hadron Collider in two independent teams before comparing findings. To maintain a critical eye when considering complicated problems, the authors recommend adopting a “third millennium thinking” mindset that involves embracing “intellectual humility” by recognizing that “scientific evidence can provide probabilities but not absolute certainties.” Discussions on the dangers of confirmation bias and drawing sweeping conclusions from isolated anecdotes are competent if familiar. More intriguing is the authors’ proposal for “deliberative polling.” Stemming from their concern that credulous readings of flawed data contribute to political polarization, the authors recommend that “a randomly selected ‘jury’ of people drawn from the American public” solve policy issues with moderated input from experts across the political spectrum. The result is an efficient overview of methods for evaluating scientific claims. (Mar.)