> are currently successfully utilizing science to legitimize knowledge
I don't understand the problem here. Isn't science - as in Poppers falsifiability - the only way to legitimize knowledge?
I don't understand the problem here. Isn't science - as in Poppers falsifiability - the only way to legitimize knowledge?
Which is what most people use as the actual heuristics of competence, including journalists and politicians. GP seems to believe that this heuristic will cease to be accepted if things continue, just like "being a religious authority" ceased to be an accepted heuristic for moral authority in many communities.
I agree that this is a problem, since going back to the substrate of hypothesis and experiment is just not very efficient. We need institutions like those.