On Wed, 09 Nov 2005 10:56:40 -0800, Paul Smith
Rick Stevens wrote:
Maybe we could get a bunch of psychometricians together to go to
Kansas and administer IQ tests.
I understand the frustration behind this, but I wouldn't be at all
surprised
to find that the 6 board members who voted against science teaching
have IQs as high as the 4 who voted in favor of science teaching.
I agree with Paul: it's not necessarily an issue of intelligence but
belief -- what is one willing to believe or disbelieve.
Furthermore, I think we
risk contributing to the problem if we continue to refer to this kind of
thing
as a matter of low intelligence, simply because I think we're wrong about
that.
I am fairly sure that the problem is more the product of misplaced goals:
that
the creationists put the goal of the defense of fundamentalist religious
beliefs above the goal of teaching science. Having done so, their actions
are
not only not stupid, but in fact effective, intelligent, well-planned
means to
reach their goals.
Michael Schmer in his "Why People Believe Weird Things" takes on
this issue in his chapter 18 "Why Smart People Believe Weird Things"
whether it is ID or UFO abductions or ESP or whatever belief systems
are in conflict with scientific analysis and knowledge. I think that it is
important to understand why people maintain "beliefs" which appear
to be in conflict with facts or reality in general (as long as they're not
floridly psychotic) if for no other reason than *there are so many of them,
indeed, they probably vastly outnumber scientists and other "rational"
folks*. U.S. Senator Bill Frist understands this point which is why,
even though he is a cardiologist, he publicly supports ID -- when
election time comes if the people with the "nutty" beliefs are in the
majority,
savvy politicians will cater to those (regardless of their actual beliefs)
because that's how they get elected and maintain power.
I don't have any magic solution to the problem, unfortunately, but I
think that the problem would be better addressed by better character
education than by focusing on intelligence.
Well, I think that there are probably two general ways to approach this
situation:
(1) Some sort of working arrangement has to be developed so that
scientific research and teaching can continue without religious
interference.
This would require some sort of cooperative effort and compromise with
the people who believe in creationism and who are fundamentalists.
(2) The Machivellian/Barnum Solution: if you can't join them, con them.
Cynically, we can view people who believe in ID, creationism, etc., as
"marks" or "suckers" who can be manipulated to behave in certain ways.
The question/problem becomes how to con the "marks/suckers" to do
what one wants (e.g., divorce religious issues from the teaching of
science).
I think that this type of approach is probably repugnant to most people
but I have the suspicion that this is what might be characterized as
"business
as usual" by politicians.
No, I don't think there are any simple solutions.
-Mike Palij
New York University
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Paul Smith
Alverno College
Milwaukee
---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
