> Science denialism should be punishable by law like holocaust denialism is
in some parts of the world.
I can't say I agree with this. No view, no matter how disgusting, is as
disgusting as censorship. Where holocaust denial is illegal, that is an
injustice. Where showing a swastika is illegal, that is an injustice. Freedom
of speech is essential.
I don't even think it's immoral to reject science; this is just a belief,
after all. What is immoral is doing something which the scientific evidence
suggests is harmful to others. For example, refusing any vaccination
recommended by your doctor (for yourself or your child, as refusing it for
yourself reduces herd immunity, potentially putting the life of someone else
who couldn't get vaccinated at risk).
A good historical example of someone refusing to accept science and causing
harm to others because of this was Typhoid Mary. She was told multiple times
that she was infecting people with typhoid fever, and that this was because
she was a typhoid carrier and was preparing food without washing her hands.
But she rejected the science and continued to make food for people without
washing her hands, resulting in more illness and death. This action from her
was immoral, and she was effectively guilty of manslaughter in my opinion.
But it wouldn't have been immoral for her to simply disbelieve the science if
she had followed the advice of her doctors anyway (either stop making food
for others, or properly wash her hands before doing so), and it wasn't
immoral for her to express her disbelief in the science.
