• Paul Monk reflected on the unfolding events in Iran and what history can teach us about where the nation might be heading.
• Samuel Finnerty examined why some climate scientists are turning to protest.
• Beth DuFault wrote about the history of science needing to compete in the marketplace of ideas.

By Paul Monk

I am old enough to remember the overthrow of the Shah in 1978-79. The Iran/Iraq war took place throughout the 1980s – as I was doing my PhD – and the only ray of hope in the whole of the Middle East was the Begin/Sadat treaty in 1979. The Shah fled to Egypt in mid-January 1979, though his overthrow didn’t become official until 11 February 1979. The Accord between Egypt and Israel was signed on 26 March 1979. This was all current affairs in the 1980s. At that time, I began to take a sidelong interest in Iran. Read the full article

From marches and demonstrations to civil disobedience, scientists are increasingly turning to climate protest. As a social psychologist, I’ve been investigating why researchers – who are trained to value scientific norms of objectivity and restraint – choose to engage in such public and sometimes disruptive action. My study, just published in the journal PLOS Climate addresses this question by exploring scientists’ own experiences and decision-making. Read the full article

People often see science as a world apart: cool, rational and untouched by persuasion or performance. In this view, scientists simply discover truth, and truth speaks for itself. But history tells a different story. Scientific theories do not simply reveal themselves; they compete for attention, credibility and uptake. US Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr once suggested that “the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market,” a line that helped popularise the metaphor of a “marketplace of ideas.” Read the full article

Choosing not to have children is not selfish — it may be responsible. Choosing not to have children is often framed as selfish or socially disengaged. Yet, in a world confronting climate breakdown, biodiversity loss and resource depletion, remaining childfree can be an ethical and environmentally responsible choice. Child-rearing in Australia is supported by an expanding web of subsidies, from paid parental leave and childcare assistance to education funding and tax concessions. While these policies aim to support families, they also reinforce the idea that reproduction is the default life path. Read the full article