Which is a “natural” assumption?
It is no secret that many American adults reject some scientific ideas. In a 2005 Pew Trust poll, for instance, 42% of respondents said that they believed that humans and other animals have existed in their present form since the beginning of time. A substantial minority of Americans, then, deny that evolution has even taken place, making them more radical than “Intelligent Design” theorists, who deny only that natural selection can explain complex design. But evolution is not the only domain in which people reject science: Many believe in the efficacy of unproven medical interventions, the mystical nature of out-of-body experiences, the existence of supernatural entities such as ghosts and fairies, and the legitimacy of astrology, ESP, and divination.
There are two common assumptions about the nature of this resistance. First, it is often assumed to be a particularly American problem, explained in terms of the strong religious beliefs of many American citizens and the anti-science leanings of the dominant political party. Second, the problem is often characterized as the result of insufficient exposure to the relevant scientific facts, and hence is best addressed with improved science education.
We believe that these assumptions, while not completely false, reflect a misunderstanding of the nature of this phenomenon. While cultural factors are plainly relevant, American adults’ resistance to scientific ideas reflects universal facts about what children know and how children learn. If this is right, then resistance to science cannot be simply addressed through more education; something different is needed.
Edge 211 offers up essays and articles ranging from Stephen Colbert to Craig Venter, the Bible to Genomic Design. This essay catches my eye [and brain] as one of the most thought-provoking. It tries to push you beyond the easy answers.
People have always and will always reject science, but one of the reasons I like my religion Christianity is that it does not rule out science. Many books of the Bible describe scientific things, and I’m ok with that. Jonah the Prophet describes underwater mountains in his book, which were not known to exist for a long time afterwards. In the book of Job, God asks Job, “Do you know the laws of the heavens? Can you set up God’s dominion over the earth?(Job 38:33) Likewise He goes on to describe things of nature such as lightning, thunder, how rain comes from dew, and many impressive things for a culture probably still in the Bronze Age. I truly wish religion and science could get along more, because, in at least my religion, it seems like they should.
#30, dwright, flat out stating something is true when it is merely a good theory is foolish.
Scientists never state a theory is true, but mathematicians do, when a rigorous proof receives peer reviewed acceptance. Maybe you mistook one for the other?
I know you want to pin this one conservative Christians but they certainly aren’t the only segments of society who are scientifically challenged.
Think of all the people who are afraid to live under power lines; refuse to have their kids vaccinated, go to chiropractors, agriculturalists, homeopaths and all sorts of quack; and are afraid of carefully tested medicine but eagerly take goodness-knows-what pill under the advise of somebody with absolutely no medial training at all.
he he … dang Firebird spell checker! acupuncturists
… I might as well add belief in aliens; ghosts; astrology; and lucky streaks and numbers. Also, paranoia about germs; “chemicals” in our foods; flying; etc etc.
And let’s not forget how nut-case apocalyptical people went over Y2K.
You’re fooling yourself if you think anti-science and anti-empiricism is just a Christian thang.
Is it nekulturny to point out that, by definition, one-half of the population is below average intelligence? This 42% statistic is only interesting if you know how they are distributed on the intelligence bell curve. I’ve got my guess.
I’ve talked to alot of religious types. Very few of them even understand their own positions. I’ve never met one that actually understood the scientific method or its main precepts.
The few educated religious types I’ve met, in the main Catholic and Jesuit priests, dont exhibit this same ignorance. Instead, they show long term brain washing resulting in satisfaction with rote responses ending with “its a mystery but I have faith” for just about every issue.
Hey, evolution aint perfect.
@24 – And that is why I love mathematics. Absolute Truth!
Has anyone here ever seen the “Jaywalking” segment of “The Tonight Show with Jay Leno?” Folks walking around, randomly interviewed about history and/or current topics? The resulting torrent of illogic and complete ignorance is enough to send even the most mildly intelligent into a delirium from which only laughter can be used to combat the resulting state of incredulity.
This might send Lauren into a complete tizz. 🙂
#33 — A mathematical theorem is not the same as a scientific theory. You attempt to defend your (inferred) position by mixing unequal terms.
People reject science when it’s inconvenient. Liberals are known for this when they push for government programs like affirmative action, Head Start, price controls, or whatever is on the feminists’ agenda. ust look at the reaction to Lawrence Summers’ suggesting that boys and girls have different interests.