Commentary

• Author: David C. Flagel,Paul Gendreau
• DOI: 10.1177/0093854808321532
• Published date: 01 October 2008
• Date: 01 October 2008
• Subject Matter: Articles

1354

COMMENTARY

Sense, Common Sense, and Nonsense

DAVID C. FLAGEL

PAUL GENDREAU

University of New Brunswick, Saint John

What a man had rather were true he more readily believes.

Francis Bacon,

Novum Organum, 1620/1994.

The goals of this special issue are to (a) identify a range of questionable practices in the

broad law enforcement area, with an emphasis on policing; (b) understand why some

of these practices flourish; and (c) provide scientifically credible alternative strategies that

will benefit all of the stakeholders concerned. We do not provide a critique of each article

on these criteria; after all, the authors are far more expert in their areas than we are. For us,

it has been gratifying to get up to speed on various controversial issues in law enforcement.

Rather, we attempt to do three things. First—and this is not to downplay the seriousness

of the matter in law enforcement—we briefly show that the law enforcement area has lots

of company when it comes to “junk” science or what we prefer to call “commonsense”

interpretations of the truth of the matter.1We provide examples of dubious science in law

enforcement and other fields that, on the surface, appeared to have had good grounding in

common sense. And we point out that there are some very prestigious and wise individuals—

not just law enforcement professionals—who have been duped, as it were, into believing

bogus science. Second, we suggest a few reasons why pseudoscience persists and how cur-

rent controversies in the philosophy of science help to explain that persistence. Third, we

provide a template and methodology that will assist skeptics in evaluating the frequency

and types of arguments used to support commonsense assertions of “the truth.”

MYTHS AND MAGIC BULLETS

The history of science is littered with the remains of such commonsense notions as alchemy,

astrology, the phlogiston theory of combustion, ether theory, and Stanley Pons and Martin

CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR, Vol. 35 No. 10, October 2008 1354-1361

DOI: 10.1177/0093854808321532

© 2008 International Association for Correctional and Forensic Psychology

AUTHORS’ NOTE: Correspondence concerning this commentary may be sent to David C. Flagel,

Department of Humanities and Languages, University of New Brunswick in Saint John, P.O. Box 5050, Saint

John, New Brunswick, Canada, E3L 4L5; e-mail: flagel@unbsj.ca.