[Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Thread Index] [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Date Index]

paleonet Now we are talking scientific illiteracy



I tend to agree with Chaim B.  

I am not so sure that the US is slipping.  It has already made it to near the bottom and has long been there by most measures of the general public understanding of science.  True that school scores have fallen, but it's the adult population that is important and it remains static in its understanding of science.  So it is in most other countries too.   If we or other "developed" countries are worried about losing their science predominance, it will not be because the masses are ignorant--they always have been.  It will be because those relatively few who are interested in science enough to pursue it fail to materialize and I am not worried about that.  I do worry about our politicians who push ignorance, but we've always had them around too, and some enlightened ones will return soon.

In the US, the population is measured at 90-95% scientifically illiterate, which I figure must mean that they don't understand the basic processes of science and some facts.   I think that school kids are fairly interested in science topics until puberty.   Then they get interested in other things--music, cruising the malls, hanging with their friends, sports, and watching a lot of TV that requires absorption only, and all of that seems to focus on the opposite sex, another big driver in life that all evolutionary biologists understand.   Science does require time for examination, thought and understanding, something that ID and creationism don't (just believe what those guys or the bible say).  The latter you just accept, the former requires hard work.   Science has always been regarded as fairly hard because of that kind of concentration, but we know as paleontologists that it is really fun.   These observations make me wonder if spending billions of dollars in the US on science education for K-12 is really worth it.  In fact, one of the biggest drivers of the choice of careers is perceived pay, and scientists don't get much of that, at least in the press.  Doctors, actors, entertainment athletes, etc, do, and so we see kids in our colleges flocking to those majors but most will fail there too.  Those who can't or won't try those, get ordinary jobs that pay okay.  Most of them do as well as scientists, and they didn't even have to work hard.

I think more scientific understanding is required, so I'd rather not see ID, creationism, pseudoscience like UFOs and ETs, astrology,  "alternative medicine", or other fraudulent topics taught in our schools, but I think the other problems are the ones that really dumb down America and most other places.   ID probably is not going to make many, other than ID believers and Creationists, any dumber than they would be normally when it comes to science.   I'd bet that most kids won't pay any more attention to ID than they will to science.  We have greater concerns in the developed world when it comes to educating for science literacy.   Or perhaps literacy of any sort-- When I talk about science illiteracy to general audiences, almost every time someone comes up and says something like:  "If you think that's bad, you should see geography, or economics, or classical music", or you name it.  I figure most populations have more worries than whether or not they need to understand anymore than is required to put food on the table, watch a little TV, kick a ball around for a few minutes, and get through life.   In many parts of the world, including a lot of the US, this is a major task, as Chaim notes.  So for the vast majority of people, taught ID or evolution or both, the end is the same--not much.   We do need several hundred thousand scientists in the US, out of ~200 million adults, and that's not so many to generate.

I'd even bet that if you taught ID in classes and analyzed it within the "rules", even fewer would think it was a very big deal that they wanted to get involved with.  Sex works against them too.


Now that is pessimistic and I want to go back to fossils cemented into the walls of everybody's house or office!  

JHL

 At 06:56 PM 12/14/2005, you wrote:
While I see this point I have to question its validity by virtue of the
simple fact that we are slipping badly in the U.S. in science and math.  If
this debate isn't a big deal then what are the alternative explanations for
this phenomena?  It seems to me that clearly something in the psyche of
Americans makes them not take these subject areas seriously and the best
explanation would be that these areas are being undermined by competing
ideas.

-Michael Kishel


----- Original Message -----
From: <chaim@bgumail.bgu.ac.il>
To: <paleonet@nhm.ac.uk>
Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 9:11 AM
Subject: Re: Re: paleonet Not only in the USA do creationsist/IDs abound
amongst Christians


> Paleonetters:
> I refuse to cringe in horror over the impending ID doom hovering over us.
There are worse things.
> In Israel a non-Christian, ID-type of creationism is alive and well in all
the religious educational systems, including the state supported ones.
There is no constitution, bill of rights, or separation of  'church' and
state to hassle them.  The religious kids simply don't learn about
evolution.  That's right ­ they skip it, and nothing happens.
> The system could of course be improved, but it produces loads of
reasonably good biological scientists, chemists, physicists, doctors,
mathematicians, social scientists, artists, businessmen, academics, geeks,
etc. and even a few, albeit second rate, politicians.  A similar private
system in the US even produced me, a geologist, paleontologist and
evolutionist.
> On the other hand, in state schools where they do learn something about
evolution, it doesn't seem to have left much of an impression.  For those of
both groups who get to the university and study geology, I don't see much
difference.
> The point is that I haven't found ID and creationism in the schools all
that threatening.  I have been invited to talk about fossils and evolution
in these schools lots of times.  My main point, that knowledgeable
scientists seem to think that evolution explains things rather well, usually
goes over quite well.  We have spirited discussions, although the students
(and their teachers) tend to remain skeptical.  That's probably quite OK,
because they seem to be skeptical about a lot of stuff they learn.
> How about lightening up a bit?
> --CB
>
>
> Professor Chaim Benjamini
> Department of Geological and Environmental Sciences
> Ben Gurion University of the Negev
> P.O.B. 653 Beer Sheva 84105 ISRAEL
> Tel: +972 8 646 1289 office
> +972 8 646 1369 direct
> Fax: +972 8 647 2997 (day)
> +972 8 647 7655 (after hours)
>
>