The science education literature suggests that the public and students often hold narrow stereotypical
views of scientists and science. Here we argue that it is important that students and the
public understand the basis on which scientists make scientific claims. The inquiry sought to
develop an understanding of the scientific mind, explored through Gauld’s (2005) notion of
‘habits of mind’. The vehicle used to explore these ideas consisted of an inquiry into how scientists
rationalise conflicts between scientific theories and religious beliefs which are not in agreement
with consensually-accepted scientific theories. Twenty scientists from different scientific
disciplines and levels of seniority were interviewed using as a basis an instrument containing a
series of religious-based item statements that a panel of scientific and religious experts considered
were in agreement with a variety of religious doctrines yet in disagreement with current scientific
thinking, or for which there is at present no supporting evidence from a variety of scientific disciplines.
These statements acted as an interview protocol and formed the basis for interactive
discourse, which was audio-taped, transcribed verbatim and participant-validated. These data
provide a window into scientific thinking as practiced by modern scientists, and helps develop a
picture of these scientists’ ‘habits of mind’. The findings suggest that these scientists, unlike their
stereotype, hold idiosyncratic views of what constitutes good scientific evidence and sound, credible
testimony