Theory of Knowledge - Course Companion for Students Marija Uzunova Dang Arvin Singh Uzunov Dang

II. Perspectives
What are some scientific black boxes that
1.
not yet closed?
are
Which attempts to challenge the scientific
2.
can you think of?
consensus
would doubt that HIV causes AIDS? The
Who
has been accepted scientific wisdom for
link
how did it come to be accepted
decades—but
fact, and is the case entirely closed?
as
is the process of closing a black
Fact-making
and bringing closure to controversies.
box
a fact is made, the human elements of
Once
process—the interpretation, guessing,
that
and debating—and the
persuading
that did and still exist, fade from
uncertainties
From then on, it is harder to question the
view.
would have to “reopen” a black box
fact—you
such effort resisting the closing of a black
One
was led by Peter Duesberg, professor at
box
University of California Berkeley. Duesberg
the
a renowned and pioneering scientist,
was
of the first to discover retroviruses and
one
which are potentially cancer-
oncogenes,
genes. His professional isolation
causing
precipitated by his views disputing that
was
causes AIDS. Since the 1980s, in spite of
HIV
accepted evidence, he has continued
widely
advocate that AIDS is not caused by HIV,
to
that HIV is an opportunistic but harmless
and
scientific ideas, even well-established
Many
such as evolution by natural selection,
theories
opponents. There are sometimes highly
have
debates that do not get much public
technical
The case study below explores what
attention.
when a scientific controversy attracts
happens
is sometimes portrayed as a heretic,
Duesberg
against the establishment at great personal
going
Popular culture is fond of the archetypal
cost.
that confronts the establishment,
hero-scientist
sacrificing their life in the process,
sometimes
change the world. Galileo, for example, is
to
famous name; and to the AIDS denialists
a
is Galileo. You might have a neutral
Duesberg
positive view of scientific disagreement and
or
as healthy debate. However, scientific
scandal
especially in the public eye,
disagreement,
have far-reaching negative consequences.
can
there are life and death consequences
Sometimes
how disagreement is perceived by the public
for
was not alone in casting doubt
Duesberg
the HIV hypothesis but has been more
on
than most in persevering against the
successful
consensus and in attracting attention,
scientific
scorn, in the process. Is he a Galileo or
and
person with an irrational obsession? The
a
7
For ref lection
Consensus and closure
public attention.
Case study
HIV/AIDS denialism and the blackboxing
of a scientific fact
he became the leading scientic torchbearer for
the so-called AIDS dissidents who dispute that
HIV causes the immunodeciency disorder. To
the dissidents, Duesberg is Galileo, oppressed for
proclaiming scientic truth against biomedical
dogma. A far larger number of AIDS activists,
physicians and researchers, however, think
Duesberg has become a crank who refuses to
accept abundant proof that he is wrong. To them,
he is at best a nuisance and at worst a source of
dangerous disinformation on public health.
(Scientic American 2007).
(Epstein 1996).
and acted upon inpolicy.
virus. Why?
Even mentioning the name Peter Duesberg
inames strong feelings, both pro and con. After
gaining fame in 1970 as the virologist who rst
identied a cancer-causing gene, in the 1980s
178