Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Ethics and Science Literacy in the American Social and Political Landscape
http://rsacerich.kinja.com/ethics-and-science-literacy-in-the-american-social-and-1753487574"“SCIENCE DOESN’T PROVE ANYTHING!” he typed in all caps from his tablet halfway around the world, connecting wirelessly, utilizing satellites orbiting the earth in the lower atmosphere, to me, on my tiny wireless phone, sitting on a bus with a small combustion engine that amazingly makes it move at high speeds towards my destination, in order to illustrate why he doesn’t believe in the theory of evolution. As much as it may appear to be a caricature of the lack of scientific literacy in America, this is an event that happens on a nearly daily basis to science communicators and science popularizers all over the country. Sir Isaac Asimov often lamented on the mantra of “My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge,” a state the electorate is, ironically, devolving into. As a culture, we have now begun to cater to this ideology by insisting on false balance over rational discourse, anecdotes over evidence, ideology over education. To myself and many of my colleagues, this is the most pronounced and dangerous problem in America today, and the place it needs to be addressed and remedied is in the classroom.
There is currently an epidemic in this country that seems harder to cure every day, it grows rapidly out of control and becomes the overriding force of the American dialogue, consuming all sense of reason and rationality in its stead. The concept at the core of this epidemic is that ethics and science are in polar opposition, and in order to be an ethical human being, you need to oppose science as an idea in and of itself, lest you be labeled an enemy by a moral majority of your peers. When the news media conducts an interview with a leading geologist, discussing the current state of plate tectonics and the current prediction models for earthquake activity in the Bay Area of California, they feel compelled to also have a guest named Jim-Bob from Pasadena, who believes that the earthquakes are really caused by demons celebrating the rampant homosexuality in San Francisco, and the only way to save ourselves is to embrace God. This is nearly the level of false balance we’ve fallen to when discussing science in America.
Nowhere is this problem more apparent than in three of the most politically and ethically charged scientific discussions in living memory. These dialogues revolve around the science of genetic engineering of seeds in agriculture, anthropogenic climate change, and vaccines and immunizations. Each of these issues has a major ethics component that people use to argue against sound science, as if they aren’t compatible with one another. In each of these topics, the false balance that people demand is the scientist discussing the science, and the layman who disagrees for ethical reasons, to be regarded as equals.
When we look at the overriding discussion on genetic modification of seeds, a major component of modern agriculture, we see a stark illustration of the poor science literacy in the public consciousness. The concept of genetic modification, without delving into the hard science, is really the process of selecting desirable traits through gene manipulation, rather than generations of cross breeding. It’s typically a more focused method that allows for less chance of error in the end product than traditional breeding methods. The primary argument against this concept is often that it isn’t “natural.” They have in their minds that scientists are taking needles and injecting harmful chemicals into seeds, and the public in general is terrified of chemicals. This highlights the lack of understanding of chemicals, and that everything on earth is made of chemical compounds, as well as the whole idea of dose and dilution. There are many substances that at a certain dose can cure an illness, while at a higher dose can kill the patient. This is common knowledge amongst the educated scientific community, and is what many see as a failing of our education system where the general public is concerned. The false balance typically used to stir the emotions of the people that don’t know any better is to point at the idea of anything created by a large corporation must be detrimental. They typically spread these messages on iPads and Windows based computers, ironically, without any such ethical qualms.
..."
----------------------------------------------------
A very good read, and rather important in regard to finding a real road to progressive action.
14 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
You know you're done after next week. Is that why you are hyperventilating now?
