Why science literacy could be the most important skill you never learned

In an era of misinformation, understanding science is essential for informed decision-making. True scientific literacy isn't about skimming articles or quick online searches—it's about cultivating the critical thinking skills necessary to evaluate evidence and trust expertise.​

When it comes to opinions, everyone is entitled to their own. But the opinions we form should be based in our actual reality: on facts that are verifiably true. However, it’s often very difficult to discern fact-from-fiction in today’s world, especially with the rise of counterfactual narratives in the era of what are sometimes called “alternative facts.”

How can any of us, particularly with our own limited expertise, make sense of all of the information—as well as the misinformation, that’s out there? The answer lies in the importance of science literacy.

“Do your own research” - Debunking the myth of the rugged individualist

Most of us understand the limits of our own knowledge—especially when it comes to technical topics like science. Yet when it matters most, some people still reject the expertise of scientists in favor of their own opinions. We see this when individuals dismiss decades of research on vaccine safety and efficacy, or when climate change deniers reject the overwhelming consensus among scientists.

Understanding complex topics like virology or climate modelling takes years of study, yet many assume they can match that depth of insight after an afternoon online. When the stakes are high—whether it’s protecting a child’s health or preparing for environmental crises—trusting scientific expertise isn’t just reasonable; it’s necessary.

It’s vital to consider this perspective, because there’s a persistent misconception in our society today: the myth of the rugged individualist. The idea goes something like, “if I do my own research, I can become as capable and competent as even the top experts in the world, and draw an informed conclusion that’s as good as that of any professional.” This idea fundamentally misunderstands what it is to be scientifically literate.

Simultaneously, albeit tacitly, this worldview devalues legitimate, actual expertise, and opens us up to being misled by charlatans who would exploit the gaps in our knowledge. All of this underscores why we must strive to teach everyone how to be scientifically literate, and what the benefits of science literacy (and the harms of eschewing it) truly are.

(Credit: Chainsawsuit, X)

Reading Isn’t Research: Why Science Takes More Than a Search Bar

In the era of large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Llama, it's become easier than ever to ask complex questions and receive answers that appear well-structured, articulate, and relevant in mere seconds. These models definitely have their utility: they’re often good at summarizing large volumes of information, drawing attention to key arguments, and even pointing users towards relevant sources they might not have found on their own. However, there are areas where LLMs are still quite incompetent: they lack subject matter expertise, the “guardrails” that they’re programmed with frequently lead to blind spots, and they are lousy at separating fact from fiction. Perhaps most importantly, they currently lack meaningful critical thinking capabilities.

To be clear, the problem isn’t with people asking questions. In fact, it’s a vital part of how science progresses. The problem is that one’s own individual research, internet searches, or inquiries to an LLM, very much leaves one open to drawing a false conclusion. Why? Because without the relevant scientific training or sufficient experience to think critically about the issue, even a well-meaning non-expert can be easily led astray. 

Remember: LLMs are not inherently guided by factual accuracy or subject matter expertise—they generate responses based solely on information that exists within their training data sets and the goals for which they’re trained. These are very different goals from those that a scientist has: scientists care about factually accurate, verifiable information that’s robust and based in physical reality. If you query an LLM, the quality of your results are constrained by whatever guardrails the LLM had programmed into it. In other words, you may receive eloquent responses,  but they require careful interpretation and expert fact-checking—especially in scientific contexts where accuracy matters.

While asking questions is a great way to approach the acquisition of knowledge, it’s false to assume that any of the off-the-shelf LLMs, or an internet search, is just as good as someone with expert-level knowledge at giving you expert-level answers. Using an LLM to “do research” without scientific context or expert involvement is no substitute for the bona fide expertise of an immunologist, meteorologist, evolutionary biologist, or cosmologist. 

Of course, LLM’s might return ideas that seem plausible or even novel to a layperson, but these responses can contradict the well-established findings or consensus views held by experts. In a world where misinformation is ubiquitous, and you can find a source on just about any topic that would lead you to an incorrect (but preferred by many) conclusion, AI and simple internet searches are not to be universally trusted as conduits to a reality-based, satisfactory answer to whatever inquiry you’re conducting.

Redefining what science literacy means

When most people think of the term “science literacy,” they think about whether they can answer a few rote questions correctly or not.

• Do you know that matter is made of atoms, which themselves are made of protons, neutrons, and electrons?

• Do you know what the law of gravity is, and can you explain why the Earth is round?

• Do you understand the germ theory of disease, and how antiseptic practices help prevent the spread of those germs?

• Do you understand mathematical concepts like rates, ratios, percentages, and probabilities?
  

A lot of people use questions such as these to “test” someone’s level of scientific literacy. Although questions can reveal to us where our understanding ends—and hence, where we ought to know to consult an expert—this method doesn’t help us identify science literacy at all.

That’s because the ability to answer these questions relies simply on our exposure to these topics: the more extensively we’ve learned them previously, the better we can answer questions concerning them. (Or, if we simply want to beat the test, we can ask our favorite LLM for the answer.) This isn’t indicative of any sort of critical thought, however; it simply evaluates how well we can recall certain facts and how well we can use a few specific, albeit basic, scientific tools. We aren’t actually performing science, which is fundamentally the act of questioning, investigating, and interrogating nature by subjecting it to experiments and observations, which in turn reveal fundamental truths about its behavior.

Two pillars of scientific literacy in society

The solution to creating a scientifically literate society isn’t to strive for a society where everyone—at some level—becomes a scientist for themselves. That’s wholly unnecessary, and even if we took that step, it wouldn’t help astrophysicists understand anatomy, or gastroenterologists understand geology, or climate scientists understand cryptography. Instead of requiring scientific mastery of a wide variety of subjects, there’s a much more promising path to scientific literacy: one that’s actually incredibly simple and straightforward. To achieve a scientifically literate society, we should start by focusing on the following two things:

We should foster an awareness of what the enterprise of science actually is 

This includes understanding how science works: how it takes an initial idea or hypothesis and subjects it to a rigorous set of tests, ruling out alternatives and validating or confirming expectations for what should occur under a wide variety of circumstances. It builds up knowledge slowly and cumulatively, and refines itself in a self-correcting fashion over time.

Credit: Max Planck by Hugo Erfurth 1938

This allows us to obtain our best-possible picture of reality: one that is consistent with the full suite of relevant evidence that we gather. By achieving this awareness, something wonderful and powerful comes along with it: an understanding of basic scientific principles, which helps us understand how science-based knowledge stands on such solid ground.

We should foster an appreciation for how applying the best known science to our societal problems positively impacts all of us 

When a hurricane is coming, or when a disease outbreak arrives on our shores, or when tainted food arrives in our supermarkets, we feel compelled to protect ourselves and our loved ones.

What’s the best way to do this? By gathering the most accurate and up-to-date scientific information we can—information that’s then evaluated by trusted experts—and make good policy decisions based on those facts and evaluations. It’s the best way to minimize the damage we’ll incur, as well as to maximize the benefits to society: granting us longer, healthier, more stable lives.

Science literacy as a path to societal progress

If we hope to combat misinformation and mitigate the effects of only having a limited amount of knowledge and expertise ourselves, science literacy must be our constant companion. Across every part of life that affects us, there are experts who devote their careers to answering the simple question:“what is true?”. 

Science literacy means recognizing when a question lies beyond our own expertise—and understanding why it’s essential to turn to those who have spent decades mastering the subject. It’s how we distinguish trustworthy knowledge from persuasive noise, and how we avoid mistaking surface-level familiarity for deep understanding. Our ability to understand the laws of nature and to develop new technologies as a result has dramatically improved the life, health, and safety of every human on Earth. When we choose to champion the path of the scientifically literate, we’re not just placing our trust in experts—we’re placing our trust in the process that has lifted humanity from myth to medicine, from fire to fusion. And that choice, now more than ever, determines the future we create together.