1.1 Introduction and When Is Science Relevant

Scientific expertise is essential in public decision making, but how should it be integrated with the diverse values in a society? We distinguish between facts and values and provoke a discussion on democracy vs. epistocracy as systems for making societal decisions.

The Lesson in Context

As the first topic of the course, this lesson sets the tone by teaching the importance of science in society and political decision making. Specifically, societal decision making in a well-functioning society incorporates factual knowledge offered by scientific expertise with values judgments made by the wider public. We allude to processes for decision making that incorporate facts and values that will be taught near the end of the semester.

Later Lessons

5.1 False Positives and Negatives

• In any detection problem, such as in smoke detectors or medical diagnosis, it is not sufficient to obtain a measurement value from an instrument. The decision of where to place the threshold for detection depends on a values judgment of the severity of the consequence of a false (non)-detection.

13.1 Denver Bullet Study

• Denver Bullet Study method incorporates facts and values by splitting the decision making process into two parts. Factual evaluation is done by relevant experts, while the prioritizing of values is done independently by the general public.

13.2 Deliberative Polling

• Deliberative polling incorporates facts and values by providing a neutral and factual briefing document as well as opinions by relevant experts, while letting participants from the general public deliberate with each other in groups.

Takeaways

Learning GoalsDefinitionsExamplesExpanded Learning Goals

After this lesson, students should

1. Recognize the need to distinguish facts from values in political and everyday decision-making.
2. Realize that social and behavioral aspects of the world can be approached scientifically and, therefore, have relevant experts.
3. Understand that scientific expertise has utility for political decision-making.

Sometimes people think political decision-making is entirely a matter of values and opinions. However, an evidence-based scientific understanding can inform us about which policies are likely to have which outcomes. Sometimes politicians disagree not only about values, but also about facts. Scientific expertise, when the system is working effectively, can help arbitrate some of these disputes over fact, though not those over value.

Facts

Claims about the objective truth of reality. Everything that is the case. What is, descriptively, including spatial relations, causal relations, attributes of objects, etc.

Values

What is of value, important, of worth. Oughts, shoulds, etcs.

Students tend to be familiar with the distinction between facts and values. The commonest misconception is the idea that there are no facts about values. A result from a survey about values can be a matter of fact, even if its interpretation is likely to be influenced by value. A simpler example: A person's love of ice cream may be a value they have, but that they love ice cream is a fact about them.

Democracy

A system of government wherein a society's citizens all have input into policies.

Epistocracy

A system of government wherein a particular subset of a society—privileged by their education or other markers of expertise—decides policies.

Claim of Value

"Ice cream is delicious!" is a claim of value.

Claim of Fact About a Value

"I love ice cream." is a claim of fact about a value.

Political Disagreement

Many politicians disagree not only on values and opinions, but also about facts. Scientific expertise (when the system is working effectively) can help arbitrate some of these disputes over fact, though not those over value.

Exemplary Quotes

“But the efficacy of wearing a bicycle helmet is a simple factual question that we should be able to get an answer for.”

“It was embarrassing to discover how often my choice in the grocery store was determined by something irrelevant to the actual contents of the item.”

“I think the best system is some combination of democracy and epistocracy. We sort of have a version of that in California, because politicians get experts to advise them and the citizens all get to vote for propositions. But the best system, I think, would be mostly epistocratic about issues where most of the disagreement is over fact, because experts are best at figuring out what the real facts are. For example, scientists are best at figuring out how bad climate change is likely to be, and economists and psychologists can help change people's behavior while physicists and engineers develop better technologies to reduce climate change. But when it comes to issues where most of the disagreement is about values, like who should pay for the new technologies, then maybe democracy makes more sense, to give everyone a voice and make sure our policies fit the values of our society as a whole. But even for that, facts are relevant, like how taxes on cars or gas will affect the rest of the economy. So I guess since the facts and values get tangled up together, we usually need to combine democratic and epistocratic elements. It's a hard question.”

After this lesson, students should

1. Attitudes
   1. Recognize the need to distinguish facts from values in political and everyday decision-making.
      1. When the attitude is relevant and useful:
         1. When policies are not made because people believe they disagree about values, but really disagree about facts.
         2. When policies are not made because people believe they disagree about facts, but really disagree about values.
         3. When a better understanding of facts vs. values is needed to communicate with someone who disagrees with you.
         4. When reading the news or listening to a lecture and values are presented as facts.
      2. When the attitude is likely to come up easily and naturally:
         1. In everyday conversations with colleagues, family, and friends.
      3. When the attitude tends to be missing:
         1. Situations in which two people debating a topic feel there is no mutual understanding between them.
2. Concept Acquisition
   1. Facts vs. Values:
      1. Facts: Objectively true claims about reality. Everything that is the case. What is, descriptively, including spatial relations, causal relations, attributes of objects, etc.
      2. Values: What is of value, important, of worth. Oughts, shoulds, etc.
   2. Democracy vs. Epistocracy:
      1. Democracy: A system wherein a society's citizens have more or less equal input into policies.
      2. Epistocracy: A system wherein a particular subset of a society—privileged by their education or other markers of expertise—decides policies.
   3. Scientific expertise has utility for political decision-making.
   4. Social and behavioral aspects of the world can be approached scientifically and, therefore, have relevant experts.
3. Concept Application
   1. Facts vs. Values
      1. Distinguish between facts and values in public debates and everyday decision-making.
      2. Identify ways in which facts and values are intertwined in public debates and everyday decision-making.
      3. Recognize when values determine which facts are viewed as relevant.
      4. Use the distinction between facts and values to identify appropriate source(s) of authority in decision-making.
      5. Justify when it is appropriate for everyone to have a vote.
      6. Justify when it is appropriate for science to have a role in democratic decision-making, and explain what that role should be.
   2. Democracy vs. Epistocracy
      1. Explain the arguments for each.
      2. Describe the tension between the claims of the two.
      3. Appeal to scientific expertise (including in the social and behavioral sciences) for political decision-making.
      4. Identify democratic and epistocratic aspects of real governments.

Additional Content

You must be logged in to see this content.

---

⟨

All lesson plans

⟨

Previous

Lesson plans

⟩

Next

1.2 Shared Reality and Modeling