Scientific consensus is often invoked as a reliable guide for non-experts. However, historians note that consensus has sometimes been wrong—continental drift was once rejected, and medical bloodletting was once standard practice. Defenders of consensus argue that modern science has better error-correction mechanisms, and that while consensus can be wrong, it remains the best available guide for non-experts who cannot evaluate primary evidence themselves.
The passage suggests that
the authority of scientific consensus involves weighing its reliability against historical limitations
scientific consensus is always correct
non-experts should ignore scientific consensus entirely
modern science has no error-correction mechanisms
Correct Answer: A
Choice A is the best answer. The passage presents both limitations and continued value of consensus.
- Context clues: Consensus "has sometimes been wrong"; but it remains "the best available guide."
- Meaning: Trusting consensus requires acknowledging fallibility while recognizing practical value.
- Verify: The weighing of reliability against historical errors captures the balanced argument.
đź’ˇ Strategy: When both strengths and weaknesses are presented, infer that evaluation involves weighing both.
Choice B is incorrect because historical examples show consensus was wrong. Choice C is incorrect because consensus remains recommended as "the best available guide." Choice D is incorrect because modern science has "better error-correction mechanisms."