Mark Richards wrote:
So you think that in science pages, for example, space should be given to different theories based on their relative popularity? This will wreak havock on evolution, not to mention gravity! Are you really serious?
We can simply contextualize what we're talking about. If an article is in the context of a scientific theory, it should say what the scientific viewpoint on it is. If other communities disagree, these could be mentioned briefly. If there is a lot to mention, a separate article such as [[creationism]] or [[controversies involving evolution]], or something of that sort, is warranted.
Sometimes this is hard to do, but I think usually it's possible. To take one example, something like [[clinical depression]] could describe the orthodox psychiatric view of clinical depression, with a mention that it's controversial and a link to a more general article and/or an article specifically about the controversy. If this had been 1970, when orthodox psychiatry considered homosexuality a mental illness, we'd have a similar case, where we'd have [[homosexuality (paraphilia)]] describing psychiatry's take on it and linking to [[homosexuality]] or [[gay]] or something of that sort describing controversies and other views on the matter.
The problem with a hardcore scientism point of view is that scientists are not always right, as the homosexuality example illustrates.
-Mark