I can only speak to my personal experience, which is that I 
have encountered many people--non-scientists, scientists, and biology students 
(among others)--who do not understand the basics of evolution. When I was a TA, 
there were undergraduate biology majors (these were freshmen and sophomores for 
the most part) who only understand evolution to be: survival of the fittest. In 
their minds though, "fittest" meant organisms that are the strongest physically 
(for the record, they never claimed that evolution is a lie or that they had 
religious beliefs contrary to scientific theories). It was eye-opening to try 
to instruct past their confusion and misconceptions. A lot of these students 
were hard workers, intelligent and thoughtful--so who can be blamed for their 
ignorance? Their high school teachers? The curriculum the high school teachers 
are forced to use? 
 
I'm worried that as much as proponents of Intelligent Design can further muddy 
the waters, this ignorance about evolution also stems from a fundamental 
misunderstanding of it that, at most, has only a partial basis in 
religious beliefs. There also seems to be a condescending judgement of 
education majors that they can't or won't work to understand basic science--and 
therefore they are largely responsible for student's lack of 
knowledge. Apologies for stating what is fairly obvious, but full 
responsibility rests with all parties--teachers to present the information, 
students to work to understand it (and ask when they don't), school 
administrators to insist that science and religion do not cross when 
determining curriculum in public schools, and scientists (teachers included) to 
help better disseminate and explain new developments in theories, expound upon 
current theories and hypotheses, etc.
 
Erin Cleere, M.S.

 

"The ultimate measure of a man or woman is not where he stands in moments of 
comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and 
controversy. The true neighbor will risk his position, his prestige, and even 
his life for the welfare of others. In dangerous valleys and hazardous 
pathways, he will lift some bruised and beaten brother or sister to a higher 
and more noble life."
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.


--- On Thu, 6/2/11, malcolm McCallum <[email protected]> wrote:


From: malcolm McCallum <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Science Communication to the nonscience population Re: 
[ECOLOG-L] Plant
To: [email protected]
Date: Thursday, June 2, 2011, 9:09 PM


I wonder how many people who "don't understand" actually have
"understood" at some point, but choose not to "understand" publicly
due to political or other reasons.  People who choose to to ignore
facts and information are easily confused with those who are truly
ignorant of those same facts and information.

Malcolm McCallum

On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 6:19 PM, Jason Hernandez
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Re: the question: "Is the fact that a "huge percentage of our population 
> don't understand (or at least can't articulate) the basic mechanisms of 
> evolution" their fault or the fault of the scientific establishment?" I would 
> say neither.  As was pointed out earlier in the thread, in the U.S., over 
> half the population does not believe there ARE mechanisms of evolution.  I 
> would say this is due mostly to the fact that certain faith-based agendas 
> actually get a hearing in school boards, so that religious dogmas dressed up 
> as science get presented as though they were actual science.  Children in 
> those school districts are thus preconditioned to hear the pseudoscience and 
> accept it as fact.  And because actual science disagrees with said religious 
> dogmas, the people who believe in them are turned off to listening to actual 
> science, which they already see as godless and the enemy of their deeply-held 
> faith.  The scientific establishment does its best to
>  break through this wall of dogma, but if people are brought up from 
> childhood not to accept science, the best efforts of the scientific community 
> are bound to meet with limited success at best.
>
>
>     Date:    Tue, 31 May 2011 21:21:22 -0700
> From:    Wayne Tyson <[email protected]>
> Subject: Science  Communication to the nonscience population  Re: [ECOLOG-L] 
> Plant roots matter Re: [ECOLOG-L] Communication Science to Public Plant Roots
>
> PS: Is the fact that a "huge percentage of our population don't =
> understand (or at least can't articulate) the basic mechanisms of =
> evolution" their fault or the fault of the scientific establishment?=20
>



-- 
Malcolm L. McCallum
Managing Editor,
Herpetological Conservation and Biology
"Peer pressure is designed to contain anyone with a sense of drive" -
Allan Nation

1880's: "There's lots of good fish in the sea"  W.S. Gilbert
1990's:  Many fish stocks depleted due to overfishing, habitat loss,
            and pollution.
2000:  Marine reserves, ecosystem restoration, and pollution reduction
          MAY help restore populations.
2022: Soylent Green is People!

The Seven Blunders of the World (Mohandas Gandhi)
Wealth w/o work
Pleasure w/o conscience
Knowledge w/o character
Commerce w/o morality
Science w/o humanity
Worship w/o sacrifice
Politics w/o principle

Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any
attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may
contain confidential and privileged information.  Any unauthorized
review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited.  If you are not
the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and
destroy all copies of the original message.

Reply via email to