In today’s episode we have assistant professor and philosopher of science, Dan Hicks, taking us through better understanding public scientific controversies. ‘Public scientific controversies’ is a term Dan uses to capture a broad variety of controversies that involve both science and the public. This would include controversies around vaccines, genetically modified foods, medical research and climate change. In studying why controversies like these arise and persist, Dan has found our common explanations are not always fit for purpose. Controversies aren’t all of one type, so a blanket diagnosis like, "it is all due to the public not properly understanding the science" or alternatively "the problem is widespread distrust of science," is  not helpful. Instead, Dan argues that what is required is more careful consideration of the specific processes and mechanisms at play in each case. Better diagnoses can then help us better determine appropriate and effective interventions. Relevant links for Dan: Profile - Dan Hicks - AboutResearch - Dan Hicks - ResearchDiscussion - Dan Hicks - philosophy of science, data science, environmental policyRelevant Article - Dan Hicks - Misinformation and trustworthiness: Frenemies in the analysis of public scientific controversiesOther links related to the episode: The Dialectical Biologist | Levins & Lewontin'Sheepfarming after Chernobyl' | Brian WynneImpure Science: AIDS, Activism and the Politics of Knowledge | Steven EpsteinMerchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Climate Change | Naomi Oreskes & Erik Conway'The Green New Deal is already changing the terms of the climate action debate' (theconversation.com)The transcript for this episode can be found at: https://www.hpsunimelb.org/post/s3-ep4-dan-hicks-transcript Thanks for listening to The HPS Podcast with your current hosts, Samara Greenwood and Carmelina Contarino. You can find more about us on our blog, website, bluesky, twitter, instagram and facebook feeds. This podcast would not be possible without the support of School of Historical and Philosophical Studies at the University of Melbourne. www.hpsunimelb.org