Scientifically validating conventional wisdom

Lawrence Neuman (2003) argued that social psychology research produces a more accurate picture of social phenomena than alternative methods of understanding because social psychology research provides a methodical process for producing knowledge. Alternative methods of understanding social phenomenon—tradition, authority, media myths, personal experience, common sense, folklore—lack the organized and systematic structure that creates conclusions that “are more likely to be true” (p. 2) than alternatives. The knowledge gained from scientific study is not perfect, but results are less likely to have flaws because of a “slow, incomplete process for reducing untruth” (p. 17).

Aronson argued, “There are no sacred truths in science” (p. 407), meaning that no matter how intuitive the concept if repeated experiments do not support it, the ethical scientist throws it out. Such declarations put significant faith in the scientific process. Truths may not be sacred, but politicized untruths promoted as truth can cause significant harm before they die lingering deaths. For example, the insistence that self-esteem is the epitome of human existence regardless of accomplishment or ability remains doctrine; regardless of significant evidence to the contrary (Smelser, 1989; Baumeister, 1996).