Should scientists communicate to the public?

Consequentialist- Yes, so that we can have public support

Deontic- Since they support us financially, scientists should give an account of their progress

Obligation to share information with the public

Social obligation- empowerment

Virtue- authenticity

Primafacia obligation- sometimes it is overridden

Context dependent

Harms that will likely follow publicity

Who should not have the obligation to communicate?

Poor social representatives to the public

Industry scientists

Moral world has moral facts

What counts as a moral fact?

If it doesn’t happen to one’s personal tribe, then it isn’t relevant

Theory is series of moral facts

What counts as success?

Conveying and understanding of the findings

The methods, why the data counts

Believe in the findings

Have the public identify science as an enterprise

Generate interest but not misleading

Clearly and effectively

Framing

Sets of connected values and ideas about work

About how things work without explaining them

You can talk about history

Galileo- You talk about a good guy and a bad guy

Church vs. Galileo

Historical episodes in science

Champion of truth vs. establishment