Science and news media: It helps not to be an arrogant bastard
| July 12, 2009 | Posted by O'Leary under Intelligent Design |
From the recent Pew Report, we learn:
Public Praises Science; Scientists Fault Public, Media
Scientific Achievements Less Prominent Than a Decade Ago (July 9, 2009)While the public holds scientists in high regard, many scientists offer unfavorable, if not critical, assessments of the public’s knowledge and expectations. Fully 85% see the public’s lack of scientific knowledge as a major problem for science, and nearly half (49%) fault the public for having unrealistic expectations about the speed of scientific achievements.
A substantial percentage of scientists also say that the news media have done a poor job educating the public. About three-quarters (76%) say a major problem for science is that news reports fail to distinguish between findings that are well-founded and those that are not. And 48% say media oversimplification of scientific findings is a major problem. The scientists are particularly critical of television news coverage of science. Just 15% of scientists rate TV coverage as excellent or good, while 83% say it is only fair or poor. Newspaper coverage of science is rated somewhat better; still, barely a third (36%) of the scientists say it is excellent or good, while 63% rate it as only fair or poor.
Well, if it’s not their job to educate the public, it’s not the news media’s either. Story of my life: There is only so much you can do in 750 words. By the way, if news reports distinguished between findings that are well founded and findings that are not, all but 5% of everything written on evolutionary psychology could hit the recycler, bypassing the press.
It would suit me fine. There might be space for something more educational than “The gene that makes you want to shop” and “The brain module that makes you tip more.” But is that what the U.S. scientists really want? I’ve yet to get a straight answer out of many of them.
Overall, the American scientists come off as legends in their own minds, believing they are much better than anyone else worldwide – we heard it from them first, remember?
36 Responses to Science and news media: It helps not to be an arrogant bastard
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Oramus,
“When soul and body separate, experience as perceived through the mind is lost. But I believe a virtual copy of what the soul perceived through the mind interface is retained.”
There’s a very serious argument in philosophical circles – I don’t know how valid, that if we did not have souls, we wold be zombies.
CY,
Actually, if we didn’t have souls we would be dead.
Diffaxial.
Is it not science that proposes 10/11 dimensions? Do we not know that there are material entities like x-ray,gamma rays, gravity, nuclear force, etc., that are unseen yet detectable? Their discovery adds to, rather than takes away from, the intuition that we have souls.
It seems that is has been those willing to ‘boldly go’ that are the ones driving discovery. Your timidity and temerity in limiting your pursuit of knowledge to the detectable is a pity.
Science could use a few bold visionaries willing to go out on a limb and say:
“You know what, it is extremely likely that the soul and God exists. We just simply do not yet understand them very well. Theology is helping us in this department and one day we will shake hands at a job well done and have the signing ceremony at the Crystal Palace”.
“Out of sight is not out of Mind”.
- Timidity: Showing a lack of courage or confidence; easily frightened.
- Temerity: Excessive confidence or boldness; audacity.
- Vocabulary: Knowing what words and stuff mean before using them.
I apologize for the confusion. I ran two related thoughts together in my mind.
There’s a timidity to go beyond detectable phenomena, but a temerity in holding fast to the notion that only what the eye sees matters.
But back to the point. Why would a person seeking knowledge, already understanding that there are phenomena barely detectable yet unseen, not take a step further and consider there be other phenomena yet to be detected affected visible matter.
Oramus @ 35:
Empty speculation concerning virtually undetectable, or barely detectable, or already detected soul-stuff, or mind, or maybe information, or maybe some sort of mass curled up in extra dimensions (you know, whatever), with all the precision of a script from Lost in Space doesn’t much further one’s search for knowledge, IMHO.