The status of scientists

Discussion in 'General Science & Technology' started by bgjyd834, May 23, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. bgjyd834

    bgjyd834 Registered Member

    Messages:
    13
    The US is still the juggernaut when it comes to its scientists reaping the most Nobel prizes, yet our educators and scientists bemoan a perceived waning prestige in the eyes of students and of the common man. Some of the blame can validly be placed with sloppy press essays, mediocre teachers, and ignorant radio talk show hosts, nevertheless, in the end, educators and scientists must be held most accountable for their own images. In an effort to inspire young minds to be innovative, the mammoth volume of scientific knowledge our country has been paramount in amassing, is presented as challengable.

    Students are instructed to question what they are taught, and that a great aspect of science is its ever evolving nature. This is correct, only when accompanied by an emphasis that our scientific knowledge base is 99% sound. Our feverish progress is fueled by new knowledge and small refinements of foundational knowledge. Much comes from these bits of refinement, but the foundation remains intact.

    US Americans are taught from childhood that they have a right to free speech and thought, that their political opinions count as much as anyone's. Unfortunately, this attitude has evolved into a belief that their opinion on anything carries as much weight as scientifically performed studies complete with details on methods and conclusions. I recall a blog comment where a climate-change skeptic pronounced that the only data he required to discount the theory, came from his own thermometer in Alaska.

    The gross misconception that all opinion weighs equally when addressing scientific thought, must be changed, not through arrogance and criticism, but through careful custodial upkeep of the image of scientists and their methods.

    Educators and scientists will only enjoy an enhanced prestige once they learn to portray themselves and their endeavors as foundational, credible, and essential to an ever improving standard of living that most people of the world experience and cherish.
     
    bgjyd834, May 23, 2011
    #1

  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Fraggle Rocker

    Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    Many people in the communication profession, like myself, pinpoint the problem as a serious lack of communication skills among scientists. Most of them are not particularly good speakers, period. I remember having trouble staying awake in science classes, even though I was fascinated by the material. But others just don't have the right attitude to communicate with laymen.

    As you point out, they overstress the fact that science never proves something 100% true, without explaining what 99.999% true means. It means, for example, that it takes an Einstein to find the flaws in Newton's Laws of Motion. A teenager with two years of college physics is not going to find the flaws in the Theory of Relativity, and a Jesus-freak with a PhD in Creation Science from Ambassador College (is that place still in business?) is not going to find the flaws in the Theory of Evolution.

    ClimateGate didn't help. Scientists were too worried about covering their asses to worry about the impression they were making on everybody else. Sounds very much like the business world! And in the USA, where science has been largely hijacked by corporations, this is understandable. This could be one of the many factors in the decline of our country, which is widely predicted by people elsewhere.

    There are some encouraging signs that the profession has finally started to worry about this. Several books have been written by scientists, explaining to other scientists how to make their points with laymen. The topic was even given substantial coverage in the Washington Post.

    As I have often said right here, they should start by repairing their language. Why call evolution and relativity "theories," when to the general public a theory is nothing more than what we call a hypothesis, or even just a hunch?

    It's as if science were a medieval guild craft. Until you go through your apprenticeship and take your oath of secrecy, you'll never be able to even understand the jargon.
     
    Fraggle Rocker, May 23, 2011
    #2

  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page