By Lewis Loflin | Published May 27, 2025
Science is often hailed as a beacon of objectivity, yet a growing number of Americans—particularly traditionalists and classical liberals—question its impartiality. A 2022 study in Nature (Carl et al., 2022) reveals that scientists, especially in academia, overwhelmingly lean toward progressive, Democratic ideologies. This bias, rooted in scientific norms like shared knowledge and universalism, creates a cultural clash with conservative values, eroding public trust. Why does this disconnect exist, and how does it fuel skepticism?
Most scientists are products of elite universities, where 60-70% of faculty identify as liberal or progressive (Gross & Simmons, 2014). These institutions shape a worldview that aligns with collectivist principles, such as the scientific norm of "communism," where research is shared as common property, and "universalism," where knowledge transcends cultural or political boundaries. These values, while noble in intent, often conflict with conservative principles like individualism or respect for tradition, as noted in the Nature study. This academic pipeline creates a self-reinforcing cycle: progressive institutions train progressive scientists, who then dominate peer review and research agendas.
Public trust in science is waning—only 30% of Americans have "a great deal" of trust in scientists for policy decisions (Pew Research, 2020). One reason is communication. Scientific papers, laden with jargon, are written for insiders, not the public. When scientists expect taxpayers to fund their work—$190 billion in federal R&D in 2023—without explaining its value in clear terms, skepticism grows. For example, social science research on controversial topics like gender identity often feels like activism to the public, especially when it’s presented as settled truth without accessible justification.
Scientists’ influence on public policy, from climate regulations to health mandates, often feels like overreach to those outside academia. The Nature study suggests scientists’ progressive leanings align with top-down government solutions, a hallmark of Progressivism. Yet, as unelected experts, their role in shaping policy—without public input—breeds resentment. For instance, social science research driving gender-related policies is seen by many as ideological, not neutral. This perception of an elitist, progressive "priesthood" dictating terms alienates classical liberals and traditionalists who value individual scrutiny and democratic accountability.
| Scientific Norm | Traditionalist Critique |
|---|---|
| Communism (Shared Knowledge) | Conflicts with individual responsibility and market-driven innovation. |
| Universalism (Transcending Boundaries) | Can dismiss cultural traditions or local values as barriers to progress. |
The progressive bias in science, rooted in academic culture, isn’t just an ideological quirk—it’s a barrier to public trust. Scientists must communicate clearly, diversify peer review, and respect democratic processes to bridge the gap. Without reform, the clash between progressive science and traditionalist values will continue to fuel skepticism, undermining science’s role in society. Reason, not hype, demands accountability from both sides.
Media bias and closed discussions: