Element contents
Science Denial
Post-Truth or Post-Trust?
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 14 November 2025
Summary
Over the last couple of decades, there has been increasing concern about the alleged rise of various forms of science denial. But what exactly is science denial? Is it really on the rise? If so, what explains its rise? And what is so concerning about it? This Element argues that the notion of science denial is highly ambiguous and that, once we carefully distinguish among all the different phenomena that are often conflated under this label, it is doubtful that any of them warrants all of the concerns that animate the critics of science denial. This has important consequences for how we understand the complex and delicate relationship between science and the public and, more generally, the collective epistemic malaise afflicting liberal democracies.
Keywords
Information
- Type
- Element
- Information
- Online ISBN: 9781009625326Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication: 20 November 2025
References
Achen, Christopher H., and Bartels, Larry M.. 2016. Democracy for Realists: Why Elections Do Not Produce Responsive Government. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Almassi, Ben. 2012. ‘Climate Change and the Ethics of Individual Emissions: A Response to Sinnott-Armstrong’. Perspectives: International Postgraduate Journal of Philosophy 4 (1): 4–21.Google Scholar
Altanian, Melanie. 2024. The Epistemic Injustice of Genocide Denialism. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alter, Charlotte. 2014. ‘Anti-Vaccination Parents Reject Scientific Evidence against Autism’. Time, 4 March. https://healthland.time.com/2014/03/04/nothing-not-even-hard-facts-can-make-anti-vaxxers-change-their-minds/.Google Scholar
Anderson, Elizabeth. 2011. ‘Democracy, Public Policy, and Lay Assessments of Scientific Testimony’. Episteme 8 (2): 144–64. https://doi.org/10.3366/epi.2011.0013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Angell, Marcia. 2005. The Truth about the Drug Companies: How They Deceive Us and What to Do about It. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Aytaç, Uğur. 2021. ‘On the Limits of the Political: The Problem of Overly Permissive Pluralism in Mouffe’s Agonism’. Constellations 28 (3): 417–31. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8675.12525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bardon, Adrian. 2019. The Truth about Denial: Bias and Self-Deception in Science, Politics, and Religion. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beres, Derek, Remski, Matthew, and Walker, Julian. 2023. Conspirituality: How New Age Conspiracy Theories Became a Public Health Threat. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Berman, Jonathan M. 2020. Anti-Vaxxers: How to Challenge a Misinformed Movement. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blewett, Lynn A., Davidson, Gestur, Bramlett, Matthew D., Rodin, Holly, and Messonnier, Mark L.. 2008. ‘The Impact of Gaps in Health Insurance Coverage on Immunization Status for Young Children’. Health Services Research 43 (5 Pt 1): 1619–36. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6773.2008.00864.x.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bogart, Laura M., Wagner, Glenn, Galvan, Frank H., and Banks, Denedria. 2010. ‘Conspiracy Beliefs about HIV Are Related to Antiretroviral Treatment Nonadherence among African American Men with HIV’. Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes (1999) 53 (5): 648–55. https://doi.org/10.1097/QAI.0b013e3181c57dbc.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
BonJour, Laurence. 1978. ‘Can Empirical Knowledge Have a Foundation?’ American Philosophical Quarterly 15 (1): 1–14.Google Scholar
Brennan, Jason. 2017. Against Democracy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, James Robert. 2004. ‘Money, Method and Medical Research’. Episteme 1 (1): 49–59. https://doi.org/10.3366/epi.2004.1.1.49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, Matthew J. 2024. ‘For Values in Science: Assessing Recent Arguments for the Ideal of Value-Free Science’. Synthese 204 (4): 112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-024-04762-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carter, J. Adam. 2024. ‘Epistemic Normativity Is Not Independent of Our Goals’. In Contemporary Debates in Epistemology, 3rd Ed., edited by Roeber, Blake, Sosa, Ernest, Steup, Matthias, and Turri, John, 263–73. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Cassam, Quassim. 2019. Vices of the Mind: From the Intellectual to the Political. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cleghorn, Elinor. 2021. Unwell Women: Misdiagnosis and Myth in a Man-Made World. New York, NY: Dutton.Google Scholar
Collins, Harry M., and Evans, Robert. 2007. Rethinking Expertise. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conee, Earl, and Feldman, Richard. 2004. Evidentialism: Essays in Epistemology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Contessa, Gabriele. 2022. ‘Shopping for Experts’. Synthese 200 (3): 1–21.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-022-03590-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Contessa, Gabriele. 2023. ‘It Takes a Village to Trust Science: Towards a (Thoroughly) Social Approach to Public Trust in Science’. Erkenntnis 88 (7): 2941–66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10670-021-00485-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Contessa, Gabriele Public Trust in Science: A Communitarian Approach. Unpublished Manuscript.Google Scholar
Cook, John, Nuccitelli, Dana, Green, Sarah A. et al. 2013. ‘Quantifying the Consensus on Anthropogenic Global Warming in the Scientific Literature’. Environmental Research Letters 8 (2): 024024. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, John, Oreskes, Naomi, Doran, Peter T. et al. 2016. ‘Consensus on Consensus: A Synthesis of Consensus Estimates on Human-Caused Global Warming’. Environmental Research Letters 11 (4): 048002. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Croce, Michel. 2018. ‘Expert-Oriented Abilities vs. Novice-Oriented Abilities: An Alternative Account of Epistemic Authority’. Episteme 15 (4): 476–98. https://doi.org/10.1017/epi.2017.16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cruz, Helen de. 2020. ‘Believing to Belong: Addressing the Novice-Expert Problem in Polarized Scientific Communication’. Social Epistemology 34 (5): 440–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/02691728.2020.1739778.Google Scholar
D’Ancona, Matthew. 2018. Post-Truth: The New War on Truth and How to Fight Back. London: Ebury Press.Google Scholar
Desai, Angel N., and Majumder, Maimuna S.. 2020. ‘What Is Herd Immunity?’ JAMA 324 (20): 2113. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.20895.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ditto, Peter H., Liu, Brittany S., Clark, Cory J. et al. 2019. ‘At Least Bias Is Bipartisan: A Meta-Analytic Comparison of Partisan Bias in Liberals and Conservatives’. Perspectives on Psychological Science 14 (2): 273–91. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691617746796.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Trump, Donald J. [@realDonaldTrump]. 2012. ‘The Concept of Global Warming Was Created by and for the Chinese in Order to Make U.S. Manufacturing Non-Competitive’. Tweet. Twitter. https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/265895292191248385.Google Scholar
Douglas, Heather. 2009. Science, Policy, and the Value-Free Ideal. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Douglas, Heather 2023. ‘Differentiating Scientific Inquiry and Politics’. Philosophy 98 (2): 123–46. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0031819122000432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Druckman, James N., and McGrath, Mary C.. 2019. ‘The Evidence for Motivated Reasoning in Climate Change Preference Formation’. Nature Climate Change 9: 111–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, Jon. 2022. ‘Motivated Reasoning and the Ethics of Belief’. Philosophy Compass 17 (6): 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.12828.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fagan, Moira, and Huang, Christine. 2019. ‘A Look at How People around the World View Climate Change’. Pew Research Center (blog). 18 April 2019. www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2019/04/18/a-look-at-how-people-around-the-world-view-climate-change/.Google Scholar
Fantl, Jeremy, and McGrath, Matthew. 2009. Knowledge in an Uncertain World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fasce, Angelo, Schmid, Philipp, Holford, Dawn L. et al. 2023. ‘A Taxonomy of Anti-Vaccination Arguments from a Systematic Literature Review and Text Modelling’. Nature Human Behaviour 7 (9): 1462–80. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-023-01644-3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Feemster, Kristen A., and Szipszky, Claire. 2020. ‘Resurgence of Measles in the United States: How Did We Get Here?’ Current Opinion in Pediatrics 32 (1): 139–44. https://doi.org/10.1097/MOP.0000000000000845.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fine, Cordelia. 2011. Delusions of Gender: How Our Minds Society and Neurosexism Create Difference. Reprint edition. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
Frances, Bryan, and Matheson, Jonathan. 2024. ‘Disagreement’. In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by Edward, N. Zalta and Uri Nodelman, Winter. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2024/entries/disagreement/.Google Scholar
Frankfurt, Harry G. 2005. On Bullshit. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, Lisa. 2020. ‘Covid, Climate and Denial’. The New York Times, 7 October, sec. Climate. www.nytimes.com/2020/10/07/climate/covid-climate-and-denial.html.Google Scholar
Furman, Katherine. 2024. ‘Beliefs, Values and Emotions: An Interactive Approach to Distrust in Science’. Philosophical Psychology 37 (1): 240–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/09515089.2023.2266454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaffney, Adam, Himmelstein, David U., Dickman, Samuel, McCormick, Danny, and Woolhandler, Stephanie. 2023. ‘Uptake and Equity in Influenza Vaccination among Veterans with VA Coverage, Veterans without VA Coverage, and Non-Veterans in the USA, 2019-2020’. Journal of General Internal Medicine 38 (5): 1152–59. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-022-07797-7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gaffney, Adam W., Woolhandler, Steffie, and Himmelstein, David U.. 2022. ‘Association of Uninsurance and VA Coverage with the Uptake and Equity of COVID-19 Vaccination: January–March 2021’. Journal of General Internal Medicine 37 (4): 1008–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-021-07332-0.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gerken, Mikkel. 2022. Scientific Testimony: Its Roles in Science and Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, Sanford C. 2010. Relying on Others: An Essay in Epistemology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, Sanford C. 2018. To the Best of Our Knowledge: Social Expectations and Epistemic Normativity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, Jeffrey. 2020. ‘Why Obama Fears for Our Democracy’. The Atlantic, 16 November. www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/11/why-obama-fears-for-our-democracy/617087/.Google Scholar
Goldenberg, Maya J. 2021. Vaccine Hesitancy: Public Trust, Expertise, and the War on Science. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gould, Stephen Jay. 2006. The Mismeasure of Man. Revised and Expanded edition. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
Grizzard, Matthew, Frazer, Rebecca, and Monge, Charles. 2023. ‘Demystifying Schadenfreude: How Disposition Theorizing Explains Responses to Social Media Stories of Unvaccinated COVID-19 Deaths’. New Media & Society 27: 702–25, July, 14614448231184868. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448231184868.Google Scholar
Habgood-Coote, Joshua. 2019. ‘Stop Talking about Fake News!’ Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 62 (9–10): 1033–65. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020174x.2018.1508363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hannon, Michael. 2023. ‘The Politics of Post-Truth’. Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society 35 (1): 40–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/08913811.2023.2194109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansson, Sven Ove. 2017. ‘Science Denial as a Form of Pseudoscience’. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 63 (June): 39–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2017.05.002.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hares, Andrew, Dickinson, Janet, and Wilkes, Keith. 2010. ‘Climate Change and the Air Travel Decisions of UK Tourists’. Journal of Transport Geography, Tourism and climate change, 18 (3): 466–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2009.06.018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hiller, Avram. 2011. ‘Climate Change and Individual Responsibility’. The Monist 94 (3): 349–68. https://doi.org/10.5840/monist201194318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holford, Dawn L., Fasce, Angelo, Costello, Thomas H., and Lewandowsky, Stephan. 2023. ‘Psychological Profiles of Anti-Vaccination Argument Endorsement’. Scientific Reports 13 (1): 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-30883-7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Holford, Dawn L., Schmid, Philipp, Fasce, Angelo, and Lewandowsky, Stephan. 2024. ‘The Empathetic Refutational Interview to Tackle Vaccine Misconceptions: Four Randomized Experiments’. Health Psychology 43 (6): 426–37. https://doi.org/10.1037/hea0001354.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Holpuch, Amanda. 2014. ‘Obama Calls for Climate Change Action in California Commencement Speech’. The Guardian, 14 June, sec. Environment. www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jun/14/obama-university-california-irvine-speech-climate-change.Google Scholar
Hoofnagle, Mark, and Hoofnagle, Chris Jay. 2007. ‘What Is Denialism?’ Denialism (blog). 30 April 2007. https://denialism.com/about/.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Imhoff, Roland, and Lamberty, Pia Karoline. 2017. ‘Too Special to Be Duped: Need for Uniqueness Motivates Conspiracy Beliefs’. European Journal of Social Psychology 47 (6): 724–34. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Irzık, Gürol, and Kurtulmuş, Faik. 2019. ‘What Is Epistemic Public Trust in Science?’ The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 70 (4): 1145–66. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjps/axy007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Irzık, Gürol, and Kurtulmuş, Faik 2021. ‘Well-Ordered Science and Public Trust in Science’. Synthese 198 (Suppl 19): 4731–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-018-02022-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shanto, Iyengar, and Westwood, Sean J.. 2015. ‘Fear and Loathing across Party Lines: New Evidence on Group Polarization’. American Journal of Political Science 59 (3): 690–707.Google Scholar
Jenke, Libby. 2024. ‘Affective Polarization and Misinformation Belief’. Political Behavior 46 (2): 825–84. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-022-09851-w.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jylhä, Kirsti M., Stanley, Samantha K., Ojala, Maria, and Clarke, Edward J. R.. 2023. ‘Science Denial’. European Psychologist 28 (3): 151–61. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahan, Dan M. 2015. ‘Climate-Science Communication and the Measurement Problem’. Political Psychology 36 (S1): 1–43. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahan, Dan M. 2016. ‘The Politically Motivated Reasoning Paradigm, Part 1: What Politically Motivated Reasoning Is and How to Measure It’. In Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences: An Interdisciplinary, Searchable, and Linkable Resource, edited by Robert, A. Scott and Kosslyn, Stephen, 1–16. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118900772.etrds0417.Google Scholar
Kahan, Dan M. 2017. ‘The “Gateway Belief” Illusion: Reanalyzing the Results of a Scientific-Consensus Messaging Study’. Journal of Science Communication 16 (5): 1–20. https://doi.org/10.22323/2.16050203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahan, Dan M., Peters, Ellen, Wittlin, Maggie et al. 2012. ‘The Polarizing Impact of Science Literacy and Numeracy on Perceived Climate Change Risks’. Nature Climate Change 2 (10): 732–35. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahn-Harris, Keith. 2018. ‘Denialism: What Drives People to Reject the Truth’. The Guardian, 3 August, sec. News. www.theguardian.com/news/2018/aug/03/denialism-what-drives-people-to-reject-the-truth.Google Scholar
Kalichman, Seth C., Eaton, Lisa, and Cherry, Chauncey. 2010. ‘“There Is No Proof That HIV Causes AIDS”: AIDS Denialism Beliefs among People Living with HIV/AIDS’. Journal of Behavioral Medicine 33 (6): 432–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10865-010-9275-7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kourany, Janet, and Carrier, Martin, eds. 2020. Science and the Production of Ignorance: When the Quest for Knowledge Is Thwarted. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kreil, Agnes S. 2021. ‘Does Flying Less Harm Academic Work? Arguments and Assumptions about Reducing Air Travel in Academia’. Travel Behaviour and Society 25 (October): 52–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbs.2021.04.011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuhn, Thomas S. 1957. The Copernican Revolution: Planetary Astronomy in the Development of Western Thought. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Kwon, Diana. 2019. ‘How to Debate a Science Denier’. Scientific American. www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-to-debate-a-science-denier/.Google Scholar
Lackey, Jennifer. 2018. ‘Experts and Peer Disagreement’. In Knowledge, Belief, and God: New Insights in Religious Epistemology, edited by Benton, Matthew A., Hawthorne, John, and Rabinowitz, Dani, 228–45. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Levin, Dan. 2021. ‘They Died from Covid: Then the Online Attacks Started’. The New York Times, 27 November, sec. Style. www.nytimes.com/2021/11/27/style/anti-vaccine-deaths-social-media.html.Google Scholar
Levy, Neil. 2017. ‘Due Deference to Denialism: Explaining Ordinary People’s Rejection of Established Scientific Findings’. Synthese, June. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-017-1477-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levy, Neil 2021. ‘Echoes of Covid Misinformation’. Philosophical Psychology 36 (5): 931–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/09515089.2021.2009452.Google Scholar
Levy, Neil 2022. Bad Beliefs: Why They Happen to Good People. New York: Oxford University Press.Google ScholarPubMed
Levy, Neil, and Varley, Russell. forthcoming. ‘Mind the Guardrails: Epistemic Trespassing and Apt Deference’. Social Epistemology. https://doi.org/10.1080/02691728.2024.2400560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewandowsky, Stephan. 2021. ‘Liberty and the Pursuit of Science Denial’. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, Human Response to Climate Change: From Neurons to Collective Action, 42 (December): 65–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2021.02.024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewandowsky, Stephan, Cook, John, Ecker, Ullrich K. H. et al. 2020. The Debunking Handbook 2020. Fairfax, VA: George Mason University Center for Climate Change Communication. https://sks.to/db2020.Google Scholar
Li, Wenchao, Long, Christopher, Fan, Tongyao et al. 2023. ‘Gas Cooking and Respiratory Outcomes in Children: A Systematic Review’. Global Epidemiology 5 (December): 100107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloepi.2023.100107.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lin, Weiwei, Brunekreef, Bert, and Gehring, Ulrike. 2013. ‘Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Indoor Nitrogen Dioxide and Gas Cooking on Asthma and Wheeze in Children’. International Journal of Epidemiology 42 (6): 1724–37. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyt150.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Linden, Sander L. van der, Leiserowitz, Anthony A., Feinberg, Geoffrey D., and Maibach, Edward W.. 2015. ‘The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change as a Gateway Belief: Experimental Evidence’. PLOS ONE 10 (2): e0118489. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0118489.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Linden, Sander L. van der, Clarke, Chris E., and Maibach, Edward W.. 2015. ‘Highlighting Consensus among Medical Scientists Increases Public Support for Vaccines: Evidence from a Randomized Experiment’. BMC Public Health 15 (1207): 1–5 (December). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-015-2541-4.Google ScholarPubMed
Leib, Litman, Rosen, Zohn, Hartman, Rachel et al. 2023. ‘Did People Really Drink Bleach to Prevent COVID-19? A Guide for Protecting Survey Data against Problematic Respondents’. PLOS ONE 18 (7): e0287837. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0287837.Google Scholar
Mann, Michael, and Toles, Tom. 2016. The Madhouse Effect: How Climate Change Denial Is Threatening Our Planet, Destroying Our Politics, and Driving Us Crazy. Illustrated edition. New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marlon, Jennifer R., Goddard, Emily, Howe, Peter et al. 2023. ‘Yale Climate Opinion Maps 2023’. Yale Program on Climate Change Communication (blog). 13 December. https://climatecommunication.yale.edu/visualizations-data/ycom-us/.Google Scholar
Marshall, Barry J., and Warren, J. Robin. 1984. ‘Unidentified Curved Bacilli in the Stomach of Patients with Gastritis and Peptic Ulceration’. The Lancet 323 (8390): 1311–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(84)91816-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McIntyre, Lee 2019. The Scientific Attitude: Defending Science from Denial, Fraud, and Pseudoscience. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McIntyre, Lee 2021. How to Talk to a Science Denier: Conversations with Flat Earthers, Climate Deniers, and Others Who Defy Reason. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKenna, Robin. 2020. ‘Persuasion and Epistemic Paternalism’. In Epistemic Paternalism: Conceptions, Justifications and Implications, edited by Axtell, Guy and Bernal, Amiel, 91–106. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield International.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Melo-Martín, Immaculada de, and Intemann, Kristen. 2018. The Fight against Doubt: How to Bridge the Gap Between Scientists and the Public. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michaels, David, ed. 2008. Doubt Is Their Product: How Industry’s Assault on Science Threatens Your Health. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Miller, Boaz. 2013. ‘When Is Consensus Knowledge Based? Distinguishing Shared Knowledge from Mere Agreement’. Synthese 190 (7): 1293–1316. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-012-0225-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mnookin, Seth. 2012. The Panic Virus: The True Story Behind the Vaccine-Autism Controversy. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
Mooney, Chris. 2014. ‘Study: You Can’t Change an Anti-Vaxxer’s Mind’. Mother Jones (blog). 3 March. www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/03/vaccine-denial-psychology-backfire-effect/.Google Scholar
Mooney, Chris 2021. ‘Why Science Denial Is Driven by Much More than Just Politics’. Washington Post, 27 October. www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/07/01/politics-may-interfere-with-science-but-not-all-science-denial-is-political/.Google Scholar
Nadler, Steven M., and Shapiro, Lawrence. 2021. When Bad Thinking Happens to Good People: How Philosophy Can Save Us from Ourselves. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Nguyen, C. Thi. 2020. ‘Echo Chambers and Epistemic Bubbles’. Episteme 17: 141–61. https://doi.org/10.1017/epi.2018.32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norman, Andy. 2021. Mental Immunity: Infectious Ideas, Mind-Parasites, and the Search for a Better Way to Think. New York: Harper Wave.Google Scholar
NPR. 2015. ‘Scientific Evidence Doesn’t Support Global Warming, Sen. Ted Cruz Says’. NPR. 9 December. www.npr.org/2015/12/09/459026242/scientific-evidence-doesn-t-support-global-warming-sen-ted-cruz-says.Google Scholar
Nyhan, Brendan, and Reifler, Jason. 2015. ‘Does Correcting Myths about the Flu Vaccine Work? An Experimental Evaluation of the Effects of Corrective Information’. Vaccine 33 (3): 459–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2014.11.017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brendan, Nyhan, Reifler, Jason, Richey, Sean, and Freed, Gary L.. 2014. ‘Effective Messages in Vaccine Promotion: A Randomized Trial’. Pediatrics 133 (4): e835–e842, February. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2013-2365.Google Scholar
Offit, Paul A. 2015. Deadly Choices: How the Anti-Vaccine Movement Threatens Us All. Illustrated edition. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Naomi, Oreskes, and Conway, Erik M.. 2010. Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming. New York, NY: Bloomsbury Press.Google Scholar
Paul, Annie Murphy. 2017. ‘Why Science Denial Isn’t Necessarily Ideological’. Washington Post, 25 May, sec. Opinions. www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-science-denial-isnt-necessarily-ideological/2017/05/25/c8cc8346-3f14-11e7-8c25-44d09ff5a4a8_story.html.Google Scholar
Pomerantsev, Peter. 2020. This Is Not Propaganda: Adventures in the War against Reality. Illustrated edition. New York: PublicAffairs.Google Scholar
Porter, Amy, and Goldfarb, Johanna. 2019. ‘Measles: A Dangerous Vaccine-Preventable Disease Returns’. Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine 86 (6): 393–98. https://doi.org/10.3949/ccjm.86a.19065.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Potochnik, Angela. 2024. Science and the Public. Elements in the Philosophy of Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rascoe, Ayesha. 2020. ‘Herman Cain, Former GOP Presidential Candidate, Dies From COVID-19’. NPR, 30 July, sec. Politics. www.npr.org/2020/07/30/897158910/herman-cain-former-presidential-candidate-dies-from-covid-19.Google Scholar
Raz, Joseph. 1985. ‘Authority and Justification’. Philosophy & Public Affairs 14 (1): 3–29.Google Scholar
Ridder, Jeroen de. 2024. ‘What’s So Bad about Misinformation?’ Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 67 (9): 2956–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020174x.2021.2002187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rushing, J. Taylor, and Martosko, David. 2016. ‘Trump Insists It Was a “joke” When He Claimed Global Warning Is a Hoax’. Daily Mail, 18 January, sec. News. www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3405315/Trump-insists-joke-claimed-Chinese-invented-global-warming.html.Google Scholar
Saini, Angela. 2017. Inferior: How Science Got Women Wrong – and the New Research That’s Rewriting the Story. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Schmid, Philipp, and Betsch, Cornelia. 2019. ‘Effective Strategies for Rebutting Science Denialism in Public Discussions’. Nature Human Behaviour 3 (9): 931–39. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-019-0632-4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schulz, Kathryn. 2010. ‘Stress Doesn’t Cause Ulcers! or, How to Win a Nobel Prize in One Easy Lesson: Barry Marshall on Being … Right’. Slate, 10 September. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2010/09/stress-doesn-t-cause-ulcers-or-how-to-win-a-nobel-prize-in-one-easy-lesson-barry-marshall-on-being-right.html.Google Scholar
Sinatra, Gale, and Hofer, Barbara. 2021. Science Denial: Why It Happens and What to Do about It. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sinnott-Armstrong, Walter. 2005. ‘It’s Not My Fault: Global Warming and Individual Moral Obligations’. In Perspectives on Climate Change, edited by Sinnott-Armstrong, Walter and Howarth, Richard, 221–53. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Smith, Allan. 2021a. ‘A Trio of Conservative Radio Hosts Died of Covid: Will Their Deaths Change Vaccine Resistance?’ NBC News. 3 September. www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/trio-conservative-radio-hosts-died-covid-will-their-deaths-change-n1278258.Google Scholar
Smith, David Livingstone. 2021b. Making Monsters: The Uncanny Power of Dehumanization. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Specter, Michael. 2009. Denialism: How Irrational Thinking Hinders Scientific Progress, Harms the Planet, and Threatens Our Lives. 1st ed. New York: Penguin Press.Google Scholar
Stott, Peter. 2021. Hot Air: The Inside Story of the Battle against Climate Change Denial. London: Atlantic Books.Google Scholar
Tappin, Ben M., Pennycook, Gordon, and Rand, David G.. 2020a. ‘Bayesian or Biased? Analytic Thinking and Political Belief Updating.’ Cognition 204: 1–12. 10.1016/j.cognition.2020.104375CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tappin, Ben M., Pennycook, Gordon, and Rand, David G. 2020b. ‘Thinking Clearly about Causal Inferences of Politically Motivated Reasoning: Why Paradigmatic Study Designs Often Undermine Causal Inference’. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences 34: 81–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, Kyla W., Eftim, Sorina E., Sibrizzi, Christopher A. et al. 2025. ‘Fluoride Exposure and Children’s IQ Scores: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis’. JAMA Pediatrics 179 (3): 282–92. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2024.5542.Google ScholarPubMed
Thagard, Paul. 1999. How Scientists Explain Disease. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thaller, Annina, Schreuer, Anna, and Posch, Alfred. 2021. ‘Flying High in Academia – Willingness of University Staff to Perform Low-Carbon Behavior Change in Business Travel’. Frontiers in Sustainability 2: 1–10, (December). https://doi.org/10.3389/frsus.2021.790807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Till, Christine, and Green, Rivka. 2021. ‘Controversy: The Evolving Science of Fluoride: When New Evidence Doesn’t Conform with Existing Beliefs’. Pediatric Research 90 (5): 1093–95. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41390-020-0973-8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Trivers, Robert. 2011. The Folly of Fools: The Logic of Deceit and Self-Deception in Human Life. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Tsai, George. 2014. ‘Rational Persuasion as Paternalism’. Philosophy and Public Affairs 42 (1): 78–112. https://doi.org/10.1111/papa.12026.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tseng, Sherry H. Y., Lee, Craig, and Higham, James. 2022. ‘Managing Academic Air Travel Emissions: Towards System-Wide Practice Change’. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 113 (December): 103504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2022.103504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tufekci, Zeynep. 2025. ‘We Were Badly Misled about the Event that Changed Our Lives’. The New York Times, 16 March, sec. Opinion. www.nytimes.com/2025/03/16/opinion/covid-pandemic-lab-leak.html.Google Scholar
Tyson, Alec, Funk, Cary, and Kennedy, Brian. 2023. ‘What the Data Says about Americans’ Views of Climate Change’. Pew Research Center. www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/08/09/what-the-data-says-about-americans-views-of-climate-change/.Google Scholar
Vickers, Peter. 2023. Identifying Future-Proof Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Washington, Harriet A. 2007. Medical Apartheid: The Dark History of Medical Experimentation on Black Americans from Colonial Times to the Present. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Watson, Jamie Carlin. 2021. Expertise: A Philosophical Introduction. London: Bloomsbury.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
West, Mick. 2018. Escaping the Rabbit Hole: How to Debunk Conspiracy Theories Using Facts, Logic, and Respect. New York: Skyhorse.Google Scholar
Whitmarsh, Lorraine, Capstick, Stuart, Moore, Isabelle, Köhler, Jana, and Quéré, Corinne Le. 2020. ‘Use of Aviation by Climate Change Researchers: Structural Influences, Personal Attitudes, and Information Provision’. Global Environmental Change 65 (November): 102184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2020.102184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilholt, Torsten. 2013. ‘Epistemic Trust in Science’. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 64 (2): 233–53. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjps/axs007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, Daniel. 2023a. ‘The Case for Partisan Motivated Reasoning’. Synthese 202 (3): 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-023-04223-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, Daniel 2023b. ‘The Marketplace of Rationalizations’. Economics and Philosophy 39 (1): 99–123. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0266267121000389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, Joshua T. B., Rice, John, Cox-Martin, Matt, Bayliss, Elizabeth A., and O’Leary, Sean T.. 2019. ‘Religious Vaccine Exemptions in Kindergartners: 2011–2018’. Pediatrics 144 (6): e20192710. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2019-2710.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Worsnip, Alex. 2024. ‘Epistemic Normativity Is Independent of Our Goals’. In Contemporary Debates in Epistemology, 3rd Ed., edited by Roeber, Blake, Sosa, Ernest, Steup, Matthias, and Turri, John, 253–62. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Wynne, Brian. 1996. ‘May the Sheep Safely Graze? A Reflexive View of the Expert-Lay Knowledge Divide’. In Risk, Environment and Modernity: Towards a New Ecology, edited by Lash, Scott, Szerszynski, Bronislaw, and Wynne, Brian, 27–83. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
Zagzebski, Linda Trinkaus. 2012. Epistemic Authority: A Theory of Trust, Authority, and Autonomy in Belief. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Accessibility standard: WCAG 2.1 AA
Why this information is here
This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.Accessibility Information
The PDF of this Element
complies with version 2.1 of the
Web Content Accessibility Guidelines
(WCAG), covering newer accessibility requirements and improved
user experiences and achieves the intermediate
(AA)
level of WCAG compliance, covering a wider range of accessibility requirements.
Content Navigation
Table of contents navigation
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Reading Order & Textual Equivalents
Single logical reading order
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
Visual Accessibility
Use of colour is not sole means of conveying information
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.
Structural and Technical Features
ARIA roles provided
You gain clarity from ARIA (Accessible Rich Internet Applications) roles and attributes, as they help assistive technologies interpret how each part of the content functions.
You gain clarity from ARIA (Accessible Rich Internet Applications) roles and attributes, as they help assistive technologies interpret how each part of the content functions.