Stephan Lewandowsky (University of Bristol)
Imagine a world in which knowledge is derided as "elitist" and in which scientific evidence is replaced by an "opinion market" on social media that determines whether a new strain of avian flu is contagious. This dystopian future is not entirely futuristic, given the frequent reliance on "alternative facts." How can science operate under those circumstances? What argumentative techniques might counteract "alternative facts" and the political operations that seek to undermine scientific evidence and authority? I develop suggestions by analyzing three streams of literature: on debunking of misinformation, on inoculation against misinformation, and on the incoherence of science denial.
