Do you agree with this statement . . .

Had to take the I don't know option. To say science in general is a pretty broad brush, but it seems some topics will be received with much more scepticism than others. For example lets take the evolution debate, from a scientific viewpoint it is the way different lifeforms came to be, but to many (though clearly not all) people with strong religious beliefs it is an affront to God. I'm not using this example to get another debate on evolution started, but rather to illustrate how people will resist scientific evidence when it challenges long held beliefs. Now lets turn to another example, through research science comes up with a cure for cancer. I suspect in this case it would be embraced with open arms by the general public. Simply put this time science has given us a solution to a terrible problem.

What frustrates scientists is the fact that through their discipline, they must look at the facts, even if they disproves what they thought or hoped of the outcome. But to people without that scientific discipline, we often look at scientific data and following the path of least resistance, simply dismiss it, a mistake to do so, yes, but a trait of human nature nonetheless.

The final thing the confuses the general public, and I'm sure infuriates scientists are what I call pseudo-scientists. Tobacco company science (there's an oxymoron for you :lol: ) comes to mind. Here you have people claiming scientific research aimed to prove someone's hopes, but without a schread of actual science backing up that claim.

Well, that's my 2 cents worth anyway...

 

Wildkow, by all accounts you are a more or less reasonable man, with the same basic priorities - you want protection and freedom and you depend on your government to provide some balance between the two. We are not so different, really.

As near as I can tell, the only real difference between us is that ugly religious divide, and the role that religion should play in our collective lives. People like you are why fundamentalism (in any religion or cause) scares me - it comes with the scary idea that not only are you damn sure your way is right (to hell with the facts), but that others should feel compelled to agree. I wouldn't have classified you as a fundamentalist (desire to be fooled aside) because it appears that you at least pay lip service to reality, something that you don't get from many fundamentalists.

I think this very question should hit awfully close to the bone for you - somehow, you've made it through your life up until now believing that all scientists are lying to you. I'm not sure why - perhaps your parents felt that way, or your teachers, or your church... Perhaps you were taught traditionally, but were one day 'born again' and suddenly had your eyes opened to the 'plot' (those bloody liberal academics!) Somehow, an otherwise reasonable person is now convinced that the scientific method is insufficient to solve the mysteries of the universe.

I think that means that teaching science in the United States is less effective than it ought to be, and that *some* christian fundamentalists are actively working to enlarge that divide. I wouldn't call it a failure on the whole, but you're proof positive that there are people who honestly like to be lied to - and that makes addressing science a less than productive process.

 

allow me to repeat here my response in the thread that inspired this poll.

uninformed?

uninformed???

apparently you forget what i do for a living... and if you only knew how many times i've been accused of thinking i'm a god or told i'm going to hell... or any of a variety of anti-science comments i've heard...

and how many times i've tried to explain to an individual what benefits society reaps from the scientific community and how all the things we take for granted today in medical science and technology come from scientific research... only to be told i'm full of myself and only interested in promoting my "godless pursuit"...

then you might not be so quick to call me uninformed.
[/b][/quote]

i believe personal experience beats out anything wildkow can speculate about.

and to complicate this issue further, i'll also mention that science education in america is shamefully bad and a very large percentage of americans are afraid of what they don't understand... which is IMO contributing to all this hatred toward science/scientists.

tleonhar has a good point mentioning that america only takes science seriously when it's convenient. any issue that challenges what people want to believe is clearly a bunch of bunk.

 

The poll's question is unclear.

Are you trying to ask, "Do you think that most Americans think negatively of science," in so many words? Very poorly written question, don't understand what you are asking.

I think I'm done with this particular sub-forum for a few months. Too many damned stupid questions and hate-mongering. Bye.

 

The "american public" is a lot smarter than nyou think...the "american media" which THINKS the public is stupid (because they are elitists) is another story.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ Jun 11 2006, 08:04 PM) [snapback]269719[/snapback]</div>

i was referring to my response to your response... where i explain why i said what i said. but anyway.

who needs real life citations when you have the answer set in your mind...

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(zapranoth @ Jun 11 2006, 07:27 PM) [snapback]269697[/snapback]</div>

Aw, c'mon man, give in to your dark side! Who knows, maybe if you bash something or other, you'll start feeling a bit better!

Look at it this way, you can openly bash any of us righties, and you'll have PLENTY of support!

 

The American public is at ease with science. But they generally want to make sure that common sense isn't thrown out the window in the name of science.

Science has been misused throughout history by less than honorable people to justify all sorts of things, including bigotry and virtual enslavement. That's not the same thing as saying the science was a contributor to it, but misuse of science is just as bad as misuse of religion.

When people identify scientists as members of the culture wars, they don't trust them. The "special knowledge" the scientist has can't be verified by the average person, so they have to judge the issue in other ways. Scientific issues that are viewed as part of the culture war are things like abortion, infanticide/mercy killings, euthanasia, evolution, global climate change and overpopulation.

When the person promoting evolution also tells the person they are fools for believing in God, that dusty old books don't control THEM, then the "scientist" loses his credibility. When the social scientist is reported to say that disease and famine are good ways to control overpopulation, science loses credibility. When a medical scientist advocates infanticide/mercy killing of severely deformed babies, science loses credibility. It isn't fair, because telling someone they are fools because they believe in God is not a scientific pronouncement: its an opinion outside of science.

Science without the restrictions of a moral society is dangerous. Ethics and science must be joined, and all the major scientific disciplines do review procedures and practices to make sure they fall within the ethical guidelines established for them by the culture.

We should have been more skeptical when "science" promoted eugenics, phrenology, and said that combining two drugs would be a powerful diet aid (Phen-fen). Science is self-correcting ... eventually ... but the social policies implemented as a result of the first two items were disasterous, while the third item simply ruined the life of several people who contracted pulmonary hypertension from the drug combination.

Science is simply knowledge; what you do with that knowledge is what counts. And that's where people get a little nervous.