Guiding Questions

• What is the relationship between scientific truth and justice?

• Who bears the burden of proof in a fair society?

• Can science ever be truly neutral?

Evidence and the Foundations of Justice

In law, science, and ethics, evidence is central to truth — or at least to what we accept as truth.

But not all evidence is treated equally.

Some truths are dismissed. Some lies are accepted.

The question is not just what is true — but who gets to say what counts as truth.

In courtrooms:

• Eyewitnesses may be trusted more than forensic data.

• The poor may be doubted more than the powerful.

• Science may be used selectively — or even silenced.

Justice demands more than facts. It requires fair evaluation of facts.

The Burden of Proof

In any argument, someone must carry the burden of proof — the responsibility to justify a claim.

• In criminal law: The state must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

• In civil disputes: The claimant must prove harm.

• In science: A theory must be tested, falsifiable, and reproducible.

But in politics and public life, the burden of proof is often distorted.

Minorities must “prove” they are oppressed.

The sick must “prove” they are in pain.

The innocent must “prove” they are not guilty.

When justice shifts the burden unfairly, truth itself becomes a victim.

Philosophical Perspectives

Karl Popper

Argued that science advances through falsifiability — the idea that a claim is only scientific if it can be proven wrong.

David Hume

Noted that we often mistake correlation for causation — and warned against relying too heavily on induction without skepticism.

Michel Foucault

Suggested that what we call “truth” is often a reflection of power — not fact.

Sandra Harding

Feminist philosopher of science who argues that “objective” knowledge often reflects the perspective of dominant groups.

A Thought Experiment

Imagine a society where:

• The government decides what counts as “scientific”

• Dissenting scientists are censored

• Evidence is accepted or rejected based on political loyalty

Ask yourself:

• Is truth still scientific — or has it become ideological?

• Can justice survive in a world where truth is no longer neutral?

Two Perspectives

Science as a Tool of Justice

Evidence-based reasoning helps eliminate bias and increase fairness.

Science as a Tool of Power

Science can be manipulated to justify inequality, exclusion, or domination.

Tools for Evidence-Based Justice

• Transparent standards – open criteria for what counts as evidence

• Reproducibility – claims must be testable and repeatable

• Peer review – ideas should be scrutinized by diverse minds

• Public access to data – science should not be a private language

• Protection for dissenters – questioning consensus is not a crime

• Critical literacy – citizens must understand and evaluate evidence themselves

Reflect and Discuss

• Who decides what counts as valid evidence?

• Can science be separated from ideology?

• In justice, is “reasonable doubt” a scientific concept — or a moral one?

Suggested Readings

• Karl Popper – The Logic of Scientific Discovery

• Sandra Harding – Whose Science? Whose Knowledge?

• Thomas Kuhn – The Structure of Scientific Revolutions

• Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals – U.S. case defining scientific evidence

• Richard Feynman – The Value of Science

“Truth must never be silenced — but it must always be questioned.”

— Tiger Lyon