All we need are evidence, in order to get the truth. Will it be just that? Well, in science facts and data are one of the front lines for research. For trials of crimes, the proof is sought by investigators too. Thus, the phrase “we don’t have proof, but we have belief”, falsely attributed to a member of the Brazilian Federal Public Ministry, would cause naturally great repercussions on social networks. But, even in science, many questions hang in the minds of thinkers as to what you believe, but cannot prove it yet.
This is the subject of “What We Believe but Cannot Prove: Today’s Leading Thinkers on Science in the Age of Certainty (Edge Question Series)” edited by John Brockman. In this book, answers to a question asked by the Edge are answered by 107 collaborators ranging from Richard Dawkings to Craig Venter. The goal was basically raise issues which those who are at the frontiers of research believe, even if they have not yet gathered enough evidence to definitively prove it. What appears against a purist vision of science is actually something commonplace. Consider the actors of the processes of research as total impartial would be actually naivety. These are a clear exercise to test everything we think or theorize, but you can’t dehumanize science and its processes. And, not to go unnoticed, there were discomfort on the respondents in letting themself go and talk about their assumptions even if not based on facts.
This is a book that I had a quick contact and is on my reading list for a long time. I remembered exactly due to this controversy on the Brazilian Federal Public Ministry, and I read a couple of its online essays. But as Silvio Santos (a Brazilian Show Man) would say, “I didn’t read it, but my employees liked”, that is, if you think worth reading it complete, leave a message. I’m convinced that you will enjoy.