Craig Mello and Andrew Fire were awarded the Nobel Prize for their work in Biology on October 3rd, 2006. At first glance, the coverage seemed wonderful. But as I thought about it in more depth, it seemed symptomatic of the divide between Science and Society on so many levels.
Thursday, October 12, 2006
Tuesday, October 10, 2006
Back from St. Louis
I am just back from our weekend in St. Louis. I will be posting blog entries on my meetings with Dr. Alan Templeton and Dr. Garland Allen later this week. Stay tuned.
Belief in War Affects Belief in WMD's
I noticed a little note in the August 7th edition of Time Magazine. In a 2005 poll, 36% of Americans believed that Iraq actually had weapons of mass destruction prior to our invasion in 2003. And when surveyed again this year, 50% believed they had WMD’s.
My question is this: what evidence has been presented in the past year that can account for these differences? To the people who changed your minds: what did you learn in the past 12 months? How do you know what you know?
My question is this: what evidence has been presented in the past year that can account for these differences? To the people who changed your minds: what did you learn in the past 12 months? How do you know what you know?
Saturday, October 7, 2006
Started Consilience by E. O. Wilson
Fabulous. Exactly what the Doctor ordered. It's all about the unity of knowledge, a kind of grand unified field theory not only for the natural world but for the human experience. What ambition!
And it's totally grounded in History, tracing the ideas from the emergence of Science and the Enlightenment to the present day.
And it's totally grounded in History, tracing the ideas from the emergence of Science and the Enlightenment to the present day.
Interface between (or Intersection of) Science and Society
Here is a short list of the problems we encounter at the interface between science and society.
- Public distrust of science and technology: is it really good for us?
- Scientific community isolated, marginalized, elite
- Reductionist science, specialization makes it difficult to understand
- Difficult to communicate uncertainty and risk
- Volume of information, pace of discovery, rate of change overwhelming
- As relative understanding and trust decline, public reliance on science and technology deepens.
- Decline in public funding of research matched by increased private, commercial funding compromises independence of science.
Thursday, October 5, 2006
Evidence of Poor Public Understanding of Science
From ABC News site: http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=2530079
Science advocates said the American public shows a poor grasp of science when they engage important issues like stem cell funding or global warming. They said there aren't enough qualified American technicians to help turn basic science into marketable products.
A 2002 survey by the National Science Foundation found that half the public didn't know that electrons are smaller than atoms or that dinosaurs and humans never walked the earth together.
That's because science education for most children is second-rate, especially between kindergarten and 12th grade, said science advocates. Below-average students study "pond biology and old science," Miller said.
"We see a lot of kids dropping out of science and not studying it," said education professor Richard Duschl, of Rutgers, who used to teach high school.
Some research has indicated that American science students rank worse than students in many other countries. Foreign universities in Europe and elsewhere are already challenging this country in attracting some of the world's best scientists.
Science advocates said the American public shows a poor grasp of science when they engage important issues like stem cell funding or global warming. They said there aren't enough qualified American technicians to help turn basic science into marketable products.
A 2002 survey by the National Science Foundation found that half the public didn't know that electrons are smaller than atoms or that dinosaurs and humans never walked the earth together.
That's because science education for most children is second-rate, especially between kindergarten and 12th grade, said science advocates. Below-average students study "pond biology and old science," Miller said.
"We see a lot of kids dropping out of science and not studying it," said education professor Richard Duschl, of Rutgers, who used to teach high school.
Some research has indicated that American science students rank worse than students in many other countries. Foreign universities in Europe and elsewhere are already challenging this country in attracting some of the world's best scientists.
About This Site
This website is an experiment, a work in progress.
In some posts, I would like to document my experience engaging scientists and non-scientists alike in my exploration of Science and Society. I intend to write very personal and anecdotal stories of the people I meet and my thinking as it evolves in my blog.
But I will also write more edited “stories” and post some “reference” pages reflecting my current thinking as patterns emerge and it becomes clear how I will focus in the next few months.
I have no idea where this website will wind up: it probably depends a lot on which direction my research takes me. For the time being I can say with some certainty that the number of visitors to my site are very, very low. However, in the coming months I would like it to become a place where the people I meet — scientists and non-scientists alike — can follow these discussions: how we know what we know; how that insight might be useful to improve communication between scientists and the lay public; and finally, how such a public conversation might improve the standing of scientists, scientific evidence and scientific methods in our society.
In some posts, I would like to document my experience engaging scientists and non-scientists alike in my exploration of Science and Society. I intend to write very personal and anecdotal stories of the people I meet and my thinking as it evolves in my blog.
But I will also write more edited “stories” and post some “reference” pages reflecting my current thinking as patterns emerge and it becomes clear how I will focus in the next few months.
I have no idea where this website will wind up: it probably depends a lot on which direction my research takes me. For the time being I can say with some certainty that the number of visitors to my site are very, very low. However, in the coming months I would like it to become a place where the people I meet — scientists and non-scientists alike — can follow these discussions: how we know what we know; how that insight might be useful to improve communication between scientists and the lay public; and finally, how such a public conversation might improve the standing of scientists, scientific evidence and scientific methods in our society.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)