What criteria ought we as individuals use when deciding whether to accept a scientific theory or to reject it? Do we simply trust authority, or do we think for ourselves?

Just as religious arguments ought not be accepted on faith, neither should scientific ones. One cannot automatically trust every component of a theory simply because scientists, or a majority of them, adhere to it. Indeed, one ought to exhibit neither blind faith in the testimony of scientific "experts" nor in that of theologians. The ultimate hallmark of a truly scientific framework of thought is that it is potentially accessible to all minds, requiring no special revelations, occult training, or inherent gap of status between the propagators and the receivers.

A scientist who is unable to communicate his ideas in a manner that makes logical sense and that can account, at least in terms of summaries of his reasons for particular claims, for every link in the theory, should receive no more credit than a cleric who asserts that he must be believed on faith, without any attempt at explanation or justification. Any sort of unconditional obedience to and belief in authority, no matter what name it goes by, is a subversion of the individual capacity to think.

Thus, one must be scrutinizing when it comes to any testimony. If the scientist's assertions are compatible with the data of reality and the individual's own reasoning, then they are legitimate. If not, then they require further scrutiny at the least before they can be accepted. Due to my personal observation, reasoning, and research, I have come to accept legitimate, proven science, accessible to the intelligent layman, including Newtonian physics, atomic theory, and evolution. However, I cannot bring myself to trust, on faith, the advocates of black holes, the Big Bang, non-Euclidean universes, or global warming.

The true reservoir of knowledge lies neither in "the experts" nor "the people." The only proper grasp of truth can be achieved through the functions of the individual rational mind. An expert can discover a fact or craft a theory, but the moral and intellectual imperative falls on every individual (absolutely and without exception) to follow the entirety of that expert's arguments and critically evaluate his evidence, passing through the elaborate filter of the mind only those portions of the testimony which are deemed wholly consistent with that individual's sum total of knowledge.

Every expert should exist not as some demigod immune to scrutiny, but rather a man whose ideas are constantly on trial, with every individual serving as their judge, jury, and executioner. No "common spirit" can assist an individual in this, for, as there is no collective stomach, there can be no collective brain.

The brain is just as exclusively individual an organ as any other that exists in external reality (which they all do in full). The knowledge of "the people" is to the insights of an individual rational man what folk music is to the magnificent symphonies of a Mozart or Beethoven.

G. Stolyarov II is a science fiction novelist, independent philosophical essayist, poet, amateur mathematician, composer, contributor to Enter Stage Right, Le Quebecois Libre,  Rebirth of Reason, and the Ludwig von Mises Institute, Senior Writer for The Liberal Institute, weekly columnist for GrasstopsUSA.com, and Editor-in-Chief of The Rational Argumentator, a magazine championing the principles of reason, rights, and progress. Mr. Stolyarov also publishes his articles on Helium.com and Associated Content to assist the spread of rational ideas. His newest science fiction novel is Eden against the Colossus. His latest non-fiction treatise is A Rational Cosmology. His most recent play is Implied Consent. Mr. Stolyarov can be contacted at gennadystolyarovii@yahoo.com.

This TRA feature has been edited in accordance with TRA’s Statement of Policy.

Click here to return to TRA's Issue CIX Index.

Learn about Mr. Stolyarov's novel, Eden against the Colossus, here..

Read Mr. Stolyarov's new comprehensive treatise, A Rational Cosmology, explicating such terms as the universe, matter, space, time, sound, light, life, consciousness, and volition, here.

Read Mr. Stolyarov's new four-act play, Implied Consent, a futuristic intellectual drama on the sanctity of human life, here.