Starting Assumptions are Everything in Science - Dr. Daniel Pauly

UCB biologist, Dr. Daniel Pauly on what breaks a scientific
argument, the fate of your future seafood, and the limits of
controlling one’s environment.


This conversation with Dr. Pauly, spanned many topics - ecology,
how change is simultaneously difficult yet necessary, the
political situation on Earth, and the strange nature of the human
animal. Somewhere in there, we even tried to reckon with the
non-material aspects of biology, and how futile it is to treat
humans as nothing more than a stack of inanimate atoms. But more
than anything else, the trio circled around the tricky question
of starting points in science. How can we navigate to an
explanation, if we aren’t sure of the phenomenon itself? Take,
for example, the Earth’s focus on the causal relationship between
man-made CO2 and global temperatures. This assumption about
carbon dioxide then leads scientists to the conclusion that
reducing its emission will ultimately stabilize the climate. But
what if Earthlings have made a mistake, and managing CO2 is a
necessary - rather than sufficient condition, for maintaining the
wellbeing of the planet? What if there are other, equally
insidious threats to humans and their habitat, like pesticides,
industrial waste, single-use plastics, or overconsumption?
Currently, the conversation about carbon dioxide is totalizing,
with only one correct answer - that industrial interventions are
necessary to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, and that the
planet’s climate must be stabilized and prevented from further
change. This is one of those cases where getting where you want
to go, rather than just getting somewhere, requires more than a
mastery of logic. It also requires a careful evaluation of that
first assumption - much like navigating by the north star
requires actually knowing the north star. When our ability to
correctly estimate a reliable starting point is compromised -
either by time, politics, or belief - it becomes almost
impossible to reach a robust conclusion about anything - whether
it’s orienteering, the fate of the climate, or what to have for
breakfast.  In the case of science, the systematic process
by which we understand material existence, our conclusions can
only be sturdy only if we start by considering all of the
possibilities. If one refuses to consider a possibility because
it complicates a political message or undermines a belief system,
no amount of logic can lead to understanding.  


Talk to us @DemystifySci 


Read us and Wear us @  https://linktr.ee/demystifysci 


Support us @ rb.gy/a7ueoz  


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Music: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 


Shilo Delay:  https://soundcloud.com/laterisgone