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

HuckleB

(35,773 posts)
Mon Jun 20, 2016, 09:01 PM Jun 2016

The New Yorker: THE MISTRUST OF SCIENCE

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/the-mistrust-of-science

"The following was delivered as the commencement address at the California Institute of Technology, on Friday, June 10th.

If this place has done its job—and I suspect it has—you’re all scientists now. Sorry, English and history graduates, even you are, too. Science is not a major or a career. It is a commitment to a systematic way of thinking, an allegiance to a way of building knowledge and explaining the universe through testing and factual observation. The thing is, that isn’t a normal way of thinking. It is unnatural and counterintuitive. It has to be learned. Scientific explanation stands in contrast to the wisdom of divinity and experience and common sense. Common sense once told us that the sun moves across the sky and that being out in the cold produced colds. But a scientific mind recognized that these intuitions were only hypotheses. They had to be tested.

When I came to college from my Ohio home town, the most intellectually unnerving thing I discovered was how wrong many of my assumptions were about how the world works—whether the natural or the human-made world. I looked to my professors and fellow-students to supply my replacement ideas. Then I returned home with some of those ideas and told my parents everything they’d got wrong (which they just loved). But, even then, I was just replacing one set of received beliefs for another. It took me a long time to recognize the particular mind-set that scientists have. The great physicist Edwin Hubble, speaking at Caltech’s commencement in 1938, said a scientist has “a healthy skepticism, suspended judgement, and disciplined imagination”—not only about other people’s ideas but also about his or her own. The scientist has an experimental mind, not a litigious one.

As a student, this seemed to me more than a way of thinking. It was a way of being—a weird way of being. You are supposed to have skepticism and imagination, but not too much. You are supposed to suspend judgment, yet exercise it. Ultimately, you hope to observe the world with an open mind, gathering facts and testing your predictions and expectations against them. Then you make up your mind and either affirm or reject the ideas at hand. But you also hope to accept that nothing is ever completely settled, that all knowledge is just probable knowledge. A contradictory piece of evidence can always emerge. Hubble said it best when he said, “The scientist explains the world by successive approximations.”

The scientific orientation has proved immensely powerful. It has allowed us to nearly double our lifespan during the past century, to increase our global abundance, and to deepen our understanding of the nature of the universe. Yet scientific knowledge is not necessarily trusted. Partly, that’s because it is incomplete. But even where the knowledge provided by science is overwhelming, people often resist it—sometimes outright deny it. Many people continue to believe, for instance, despite massive evidence to the contrary, that childhood vaccines cause autism (they do not); that people are safer owning a gun (they are not); that genetically modified crops are harmful (on balance, they have been beneficial); that climate change is not happening (it is).

..."


----------------------------


This piece should be read by all of us over and over again, or so I think.

18 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

RobertEarl

(13,685 posts)
1. Science gave us nuclear energy
Mon Jun 20, 2016, 09:07 PM
Jun 2016

People see that and they think what about the crazy people who have their hands on nuclear energy? And isn't it now pretty much run by the very rich?

hunter

(38,328 posts)
5. Oh my. First post.
Tue Jun 21, 2016, 12:41 AM
Jun 2016

Congratulations RobertEarl.

You are one of the reasons I now say anti-nuclear activism is just another flavor of climate change denial.

Weird, because I'm an autistic spectrum Luddite who loathes everything about our high energy industrial economy, including nuclear power. But nuclear power is not the worst. Fossil fuels suck more. "Natural" gas ain't natural, it's Coal's nastier little brother. Coal will bludgeon you in a dark alley, maybe to death, but you'll see him coming. Little brother Gas will slit your throat while you sleep.

I reckon the Gorgon gas project and its sisters are among the Worst Things In this World. It sounds like a Japanese movie monster, doesn't it? Guess what, it's worse than Fukushima. Worse than Godzilla.

In my utopia people vaccinate their kids, use birth control, and don't have any reason to buy automobiles or guns.

I lived through chicken pox with many scars, and mumps fucked me up in the land down under. My mom went through some shingles of the worst sort, a knife in the eye.

Hell yes, I enthusiastically vaccinated my children, comforted in the knowledge my family has a long history of barely-to-much-less-than-functional autistic spectrum people long predating modern vaccination. It's likely a dominant gene. My autistic spectrum rocket scientist grandfather had siblings who were not functional in ordinary society. My grandfather wasn't much functional either, his personal life was always one flaming catastrophe after another. But he was a wizard with exotic metals and an engineer for the Apollo project. Landing men on the moon was his pride. He was also an Army Air Force officer in World War II but he never talked about that work. He fixed things. Many very ugly things is my impression. He could do the math.

Clearly, my university education as an evolutionary and environmental biologist has warped me.

Learning how to do the math changes a person.

Orrex

(63,224 posts)
8. It also gave us the computer with which you post your zany screeds
Tue Jun 21, 2016, 07:27 AM
Jun 2016

So I guess I have to agree that science is terrible.

Warpy

(111,351 posts)
2. People go to work every day and do a decent job while they're there
Mon Jun 20, 2016, 09:17 PM
Jun 2016

They manage to cope with traffic or mass transit both ways. When they get home, they care for their kids. On weekends, they catch up on chores and might even take a Sunday drive somewhere. They like to think they've got a pretty good handle on life.

And they do, until some egghead comes along and says their car is killing the planet.

That's why people mistrust science, that and most of them think it's just more doubletalk, like the stuff banks and insurance companies and politicians do to them all the time.

I have a great deal of sympathy for people who are afraid of what science is uncovering and none for boneheaded editors who sensationalize it in the news magazines and TV news. I also know these people have been doing a good job at reducing their carbon footprint over the years as their major appliances have gotten more efficient and maybe they've gone from an SUV to a sedan or even a compact. Being unable to buy incandescent bulbs has some of them very annoyed, but most have made the transition in spite of themselves. After all, they don't have to get up on the stepladder to change bulbs all the time if they're CFL or LED.

This is likely how things will be done and they will be done. You can't talk people out of SUVs and incandescent bulbs but you can price them out and make the products superior.

 

RobertEarl

(13,685 posts)
3. Price it out?
Mon Jun 20, 2016, 09:24 PM
Jun 2016

That's another aspect.... the science says that the world as we know it can't continue with the overuse of the resource. People deny that, as if they think the world is what they make of it and is nothing else. Ask people where milk comes from and they say 'The store'.

We can't talk people out of overuse, so the fallback is to price things where they have to cut back. That is a de facto denial of applying science.

Warpy

(111,351 posts)
4. They don't care about that energy star on the fridge
Mon Jun 20, 2016, 10:01 PM
Jun 2016

as long as it keeps the food cold. Tell them the electric bill will go down and they'll care. This is how it's being done successfully.

hunter

(38,328 posts)
6. I've lived without a fridge as a kid, and as a dysfunctional adult. No problem.
Tue Jun 21, 2016, 12:55 AM
Jun 2016

My wife's not buying into the no fridge lifestyle.

She is, however, a vegetarian.

I'm still an opportunistic carnivore.

Warpy

(111,351 posts)
7. I don't blame her
Tue Jun 21, 2016, 01:55 AM
Jun 2016

I could live without one if I had access to a daily open air market. I could live with a dorm fridge in an inner city center in Europe. In the US, with centralized supermarkets requiring some sort of vehicle to transport the goods and limiting trips to once a week (or more, in my case), I need a fridge. It's either that or an ice box and I'm old enough to remember ice boxes and no thanks.

Dorian Gray

(13,501 posts)
9. I lived without a refrigerator for two weeks.
Tue Jun 21, 2016, 08:07 AM
Jun 2016

Ours stopped working. (New one delivered yesterday.) What sucked was no milk or yogurt for my daughter. (She drinks a cup of milk a day and usually has yogurt for breakfast.)

And not having a freezer for ice (I prefer ICE ICE ICE cold drinks.) But, I realized in that time we could make do with a much smaller freezer. And we made it work. (Maybe a couple of meals of take out too many, though.) I did cook. I bought enough for meals and things that could be stored in the closet. But we have access to farmers markets twice a week, and there are three supermarkets in a one mile radius. Not everybody has that luxury.

Warpy

(111,351 posts)
14. When my refrigerator died two years ago, I bought a bag of ice at the market
Tue Jun 21, 2016, 02:24 PM
Jun 2016

and used that in the food compartment to keep things cool enough that my yogurt wouldn't rot and my lettuce wouldn't wilt (much). It worked. I don't know what happened the next day but something did and I gave the fridge a solid kick and it worked again for two days until the new one was delivered. Still, it would have sucked getting ice every day and dealing with the melt water.

REP

(21,691 posts)
12. I know I couldn't
Tue Jun 21, 2016, 11:45 AM
Jun 2016

I live in a somewhat inconvenient location so daily shopping runs aren't practical, plus I have chickens who lay more eggs than we can eat at once. We do have a smaller, highly efficient refrigerator though.

The thing that really bothered me was the size of the average oven, where an enormous cavern is being heated to cook a loaf of bread or a normal-size dinner entree. My range has four small ovens, big enough to cook almost anything (yes, even a turkey as I'm often asked) that aren't giant wasteful boxes. One is a convection oven, and I have no idea how I lived so long without one. And it's much easier to clean a small oven!

Warpy

(111,351 posts)
15. I live out of a toaster oven in summer when I don't want to heat up the kitchen
Tue Jun 21, 2016, 02:28 PM
Jun 2016

and it's a small item I don't want to haul the solar oven out for. I treated myself to a convection toaster oven that's big enough to do a small chicken and haven't used the big gas oven since. I have a big kitchen with no counter space. My dream kitchen is a cubby with maximum counterspace, an apartment sized (22 inch) stove, a deep double sink, and lots of open shelving.

REP

(21,691 posts)
16. One of the first things I did when I bought this house
Tue Jun 21, 2016, 04:23 PM
Jun 2016

Was take out the divided kitchen sink and replace it with a deep, wide, undivided one. After a lifetime of those crappy divided sinks that nothing fits into, it's so nice to be able to wash my cookware without drama.

My range is dual-fuel; gas cooktop and electric ovens. Works out well with our frequent power outages or "Crap! The tank's empty again!" (We're out of range of gas lines, so we've got a huge propane tank, like everyone else up here ... but we don't have a landline, so the tank can't call in when it's getting low.)

Warpy

(111,351 posts)
17. I have a deep white porcelain sink
Tue Jun 21, 2016, 04:27 PM
Jun 2016

that duplicates the 1946 sink the place was built with. I hate those shallow little stainless sinks, they're good for nothing.

What I'd really like is a refurbished sink from the 20s or 30s. One side of those was a foot and a half deep, enough to accomodate laundry every day when that's how inner city people managed it. I've had a couple of those and I've loved them both.

REP

(21,691 posts)
18. This house was built in 1927 and was a speakeasy for a while
Tue Jun 21, 2016, 04:33 PM
Jun 2016

We found most of the still in the false wall.

I still have the original range that I'm sure that's been here as long as the house; its dual-fuel, too: propane and wood! People keep offering to "take it off my hands" as though I don't know what it's worth

ismnotwasm

(42,014 posts)
11. This is a good read
Tue Jun 21, 2016, 11:34 AM
Jun 2016
Science’s defenders have identified five hallmark moves of pseudoscientists. They argue that the scientific consensus emerges from a conspiracy to suppress dissenting views. They produce fake experts, who have views contrary to established knowledge but do not actually have a credible scientific track record. They cherry-pick the data and papers that challenge the dominant view as a means of discrediting an entire field. They deploy false analogies and other logical fallacies. And they set impossible expectations of research: when scientists produce one level of certainty, the pseudoscientists insist they achieve another.


I love science in the first place, but on a very personal note, my husband had multiple sclerosis. Not a year goes by where some idiocy run by pseudo-science is not proposed as a "cure"-- When the anti-science mind set invades your life, it's infuriating.

Yavin4

(35,446 posts)
13. The real beauty of science is that you can question and over turn long held beliefs.
Tue Jun 21, 2016, 02:03 PM
Jun 2016

That's what makes science superior. It's open to debate and experimentation. That's the essence of learning and growing.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The New Yorker: THE MISTR...