IEEE Technology and Society Magazine - March 2023 - 24

Book Review
climate change firsthand on a fact-finding trip to
the Maldive islands, a country incredibly vulnerable
to rising sea levels and extreme weather. His seeks
out climate change deniers by setting up a meeting
with Pennsylvania coal miners who, in accordance
with Upton Sinclair's maxim that " it is difficult to
get a man to understand something when his salary
depends upon his not understanding it, " one
might expect to be resistant to scientific findings that
threaten their livelihoods. However, the miners he
attracts are not dyed-in-the-wool science deniers,
although they evince hesitancy about various proposals
for addressing climate change. While this is
a nice demonstration of McIntyre's claim that if you
really listen to people, you will find that their views
are much more nuanced than you might expect at
first blush, it is not an especially fruitful case study of
his larger claims.
The varieties of science denial that McIntyre
has discussed so far all have a right-wing political
valence (even flat Earthers, whose numbers are
largely drawn from conservative Christians), so he
then looks for a topic that might arouse left-wing science
denial. This leads him to examine opposition
to genetically modified organisms (GMOs). He goes
into some detail arguing that, while there may be
good reasons for caution or skepticism in particular
instances, it is irrational to insist that all GMOs
are unsafe to eat. He follows this up with a substantial
chapter giving the most detailed, blow-byblow
account in the book of conversations aimed
at coaxing people to accept a scientific consensus
they disbelieve, in this case two of his GMO-skeptical
friends. As this is his most in-depth depiction
of what it looks like to dispute a view you disagree
with in a context of trust and mutual respect, it is
ironic that he ultimately concludes his friends do
not fit the criteria that define science deniers. Furthermore,
he claims that while it is only a contingent
matter that opposition to GMOs is not a central
part of left-wing identity, it is nonetheless true that
at present there is no widespread left-wing science
denial. His efforts to be even-handed are admirable,
but giving such a substantial section of his book on
talking to science deniers over to people he concludes
are not science deniers might be taking the
pursuit of balance too far.
The COVID pandemic hangs over this book. It
disrupted McIntyre's plans by preventing follow-up
interviews with the coal miners and forestalled
24
setting up face-to-face conversations with anyone
else. This helps explain why, apart from the first
chapter, the book does not include extensive conversations
with the hard-core science deniers with
whom McIntyre is most concerned. The pandemic
also makes itself felt by showing how rapidly a form
of science denial can be spun up. The harm COVID
denial does to its adherents is evident on a much
shorter time scale than the consequences of climate
denial, yet it still thrives.
The CoVID panDemIC highlights some of the limitations
of McIntyre's approach. Changing identity
takes time, but new flavors of science denial can be
whipped up seemingly overnight. And while measures
to mitigate COVID often preclude the kind of
face-to-face encounters that are so important to
McIntyre, social media make it easy for anti-vaxxers
to find like-minded people and make it likely that
what encounters they do have with those who advocate
vaccination mostly involve angry denunciation
or ridicule. McIntyre emphasizes that talking to science
deniers takes patience and empathy but costs
us nothing apart from our time and perhaps a measure
of self-righteousness. But the COVID pandemic
has shown that there can be costs that he nowhere
acknowledges. Anti-vaxxers have harassed and vilified
not just outspoken defenders of mainstream
medical and scientific recommendations, like Dr.
Anthony Fauci, but also ordinary people who were
merely wearing masks. McIntyre is far from blind to
the political forces stoking the anti-vaxx movement
and other science denial, but his prescription for
effecting political change is the same as it is for trying
to change someone's mind about science denial: go
outside your comfort zone and have difficult conversations
with those with whom you disagree. Doing
so is slow at best and not guaranteed to succeed but,
McIntyre says, it is the best we can do.

Jacob Ossar is an independent scholar residing
in Brookline, MA 02446 USA. He received his PhD in
philosophy from Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore,
MD, USA, and has taught ethics to engineering/
science students at the Stevens Institute of
Technology, Hoboken, NJ 07030 USA.
 Direct questions and comments about this article
to Jacob Ossar, Brookline, MA 02446 USA; jacob.
ossar@gmail.com.
IEEE Technology and Society Magazine
IEEE Technology and Society Magazine - March 2023

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of IEEE Technology and Society Magazine - March 2023
