On Sat, 31 Mar 2012 14:44:45 -0700, Rick Froman wrote: >In reference to the subject line of this thread, an equally interesting >question is why, in the years from 1974 until the present, >liberals/progressives have not, along with Sting, "lost their faith in Science,
I may be out on a limb here but it could be the case that people have not lost their "faith in Science" because it works, it can be shown to be valid, and, when used wisely, appear to work miracles. One does have to be on the look out for Dark Lords like Edward Teller and his ilk, especially when they sell snake oil to politicians and the military in the form of the "Strategic Defense Initiative" or, as popularly known, the Star Wars system. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Defense_Initiative >Progress...". After all, as he noted, "I never saw no miracle of science, that >didn't go from a blessing to a curse, I never saw no military solution, that >didn't always end up as something worse." It could be that Sting has a very limited experience and knowledge of science. What miracles of science have become curses? Good public health measure? Antibiotics? Preventive medicine? Help me out here. Lab-created viruses that cause AIDS/Zombies/whatever can be excluded. >It is true, as Jim notes, that although liberals haven't lost much faith in >science in recent years, they also don't give it extremely high levels of >support. But what segment of society does receive any respect? Clergy? >Politicians? Professors? I couldn't find a U.S. version so we'll have to use a U.K. of who is respected and trusted; see: http://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/2818/Doctors-are-most-trusted-profession-politicians-least-trusted.aspx For a table that lists the responses to the question "Who do you trust to tell the truth", see: http://www.ipsos-mori.com/Assets/Docs/Polls/Veracity2011.pdf The top 5 are doctors, teachers, professors, judges, and scientists. NOTE: trust in these sources have gone UP over the years. As for the general public's attitude toward science, check out the Pew poll here: http://www.people-press.org/2009/07/09/public-praises-science-scientists-fault-public-media/ >A final question: who is more likely to adopt a postmodern worldview in which >Mike's listed purpose of science ("to provide a factual, truthful, accurate, >and valid representation of the world and physical reality") Youse gots a problem with that there characterization? >would be risible, conservatives or liberals? I don't think the proper >approach to science education is to attempt to inculcate a respect >for science. I believe that will come when we give people >understanding of how to appropriately understand and critique >science. I have heard the same advice coming from single guys about women. >Science can stand rational critique; a much greater threat to >science is to be perceived as being co-opted by those of a particular political >persuasion. I actually have no idea what you mean by the statement above. Of course science can stand rational critique -- it is the IRRATIONAL critiques that are a problem, you know, beliefs like the Bible tells us all we need to know about the world (remember the Stephen Colbert question?). Given that most science deniers are from conservatives and Republicans, I think we know who has co-opted the crazy train. For additional perspective on this point, see: http://scienceblogs.com/tfk/2011/06/mooney_revisits_the_republican.php Finally, let me provide you with a Zen koan based upon some activities from this past week: How is getting health care services for your cancer-ridden child like buying broccoli? Consider the answer "Mu". See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mu_%28negative%29 -Mike Palij New York University [email protected] ________________________________________ From: Michael Palij [[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2012 9:37 AM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) Cc: Michael Palij Subject: [tips] Why Do Conservatives Distrust Science? It may have become apparent to many that there are certain segments of the population that are both hostile to and distrustful of science. This might strike scientists as bizarre because one purpose of science is to provide a factual, truthful, accurate, and valid representation of the world and physical reality -- and has been able to do so more successfully that any other approach to knowledge development. The question is why? --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=17039 or send a blank email to leave-17039-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
