Demon-Haunted World: Science Education & Skeptical Thinking in America

[vociferous]

I just finished reading this book. I found it very enlightening. I would like to share a quotation:

Science is more than a body of knowledge; it is a way of thinking. I have a foreboding of an America in my children's or grand children's time-when the United States is a service and information economy; when nearly all the key manufacturing industries have slipped away to other countries; when awesome technological powers are in the hands of a very few, and no one representing the public interest can even grasp the issues; when the people have lost the ability to set their own agendas or knowledgeably question those in authority; when clutching our crystals and nervously consulting our horoscopes, our critical faculties in decline, unable to distinguish between what feels good and what's true, we slide, almost without noticing, back into superstitions and darkness.​

Have the issues of science education and skeptical thinking as it relates to the American public improved or degenerated since Sagan published this book in the late 1990's?

 

[jim mcnamara]

No, they have not improved. This shows the results from a 2003 Harris poll. 53% of the 2203 persons polled in the sample population believe in ghosts, for example.

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=359

 

[Moridin]

http://www.gallup.com/poll/21814/Evolution-Creationism-Intelligent-Design.aspx

44% of the US population are young Earth creationists.
80% reject mainstream (ateleological) evolution.

 

[WarPhalange]

The knowledge of science is going down faster than... than... umm... some witty analogy.

But technology is everybody's friend. Look at Youtube. It holds people accountable for what they say finally. Crooked cops, idiot politicians, idiots in general. It's for the world to see. Secrets are suddenly a lot harder to keep.

But you also have the Ted Stevens'es of the world telling people that the Internets aren't a dump truck, etc.

But in general people embrace new technology in order to further their lives, not in some scared attempt to protect them.

 

[vociferous]

Using technology is not the same as understanding it. I have come to the conclusion, that for the average person, a computer, cellular telephone, or microwave might as well be some magic box, rather than a piece of technology that works in a very specific and understandable way, governed by the natural laws of the universe.

 

[shamrock5585]

The knowledge of science is going down faster than... than... umm... some witty analogy.

going down faster than michael jackson on a 5 year old! haha

 

[WarPhalange]

Bam. Thanks. I was trying to do something with Monica Lewinsky, but then I realized it's not 1998 anymore.

 

[WarPhalange]

Using technology is not the same as understanding it. I have come to the conclusion, that for the average person, a computer, cellular telephone, or microwave might as well be some magic box, rather than a piece of technology that works in a very specific and understandable way, governed by the natural laws of the universe.

True. But then again, when do you really learn how a transistor works? You kind of have to be into that stuff to learn it. LED's? That requires some knowledge of physics/chemistry, or at least understanding what an electron is and discrete energy levels.

Lots of kids these days are code monkeys, but few understand beyond digital logic, like where it comes from?

 

[shamrock5585]

True. But then again, when do you really learn how a transistor works? You kind of have to be into that stuff to learn it. LED's? That requires some knowledge of physics/chemistry, or at least understanding what an electron is and discrete energy levels.

Lots of kids these days are code monkeys, but few understand beyond digital logic, like where it comes from?

true it is good to have a basic understanding of where it comes from but it is not needed... as one of my professor always says, don't reengineer something... stand on your predecessors shoulders and further their work!

 

[vociferous]

True. But then again, when do you really learn how a transistor works? You kind of have to be into that stuff to learn it. LED's? That requires some knowledge of physics/chemistry, or at least understanding what an electron is and discrete energy levels.

Lots of kids these days are code monkeys, but few understand beyond digital logic, like where it comes from?

There is a difference between understanding a subject and being an expert or professional in that subject.

You can understand how a transistor works without being an electrical engineer. The average person should know what it does; AND, OR, et cetera.

You do not have to understand quantum physics to understand the basic concept behind something like a microwave. If someone could say, "specific frequencies of radio waves are generated, hit the electrons in the food, cause them to become excited, and thus increase the temperature of the food," that is a perfectly good level of understanding for someone who does not need to design such a device.

You can understand how computers work: the CPU, RAM, Hard Disk drive, Operating system, without being a computer engineer or computer scientist.

I guess the point I was trying to make is, though people use more technology, they understand less of it. I think that Sagan is worried about a day when technology and the science behind it is understood only by a handful of scientists, engineers, and technicians. To everyone else, they might as well work by magic as by natural laws.

It is patronizing to believe that the average person is incapable of understanding science and technology. A non musician can understand harmony, melody, rhythm, and chord progression without spending years in music theory classes. A lawyer or human resources manager should be able to understand on a basic conceptional level, how most technology works.

 

[WarPhalange]

There is a difference between understanding a subject and being an expert or professional in that subject.

You can understand how a transistor works without being an electrical engineer. The average person should know what it does; AND, OR, et cetera.

No, that is treating is as a magic box like you claim laypersons do to technology. Knowing what it does and understanding how it works are two different things.

You do not have to understand quantum physics to understand the basic concept behind something like a microwave. If someone could say, "specific frequencies of radio waves are generated, hit the electrons in the food, cause them to become excited, and thus increase the temperature of the food," that is a perfectly good level of understanding for someone who does not need to design such a device.

Except that it's microwaves and water, not food. Thinking "food" is how you get paranoid people who say microwaving causes cancer and whatnot.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

No, they have not improved. This shows the results from a 2003 Harris poll. 53% of the 2203 persons polled in the sample population believe in ghosts, for example.

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=359

What is a ghost? Did they bother to ask, or do we just assume any definition that we like? Is that scientific?

Did they ask why people have these beliefs? Did they ask how many base their beliefs on personal experience, or do we just assume that all beliefs magically appear from the aether for no reason whatsoever? Is that a justified assumption? If so, prove it.

How many people today do we find clutching their crystals? And what does this have to do with exporting jobs? Are we to believe that globalization is the result of hippy rituals?

Why is it that we are losing jobs to nations rich in religious beliefs? Should we therefore conclude that America is failing because of atheism?

 

[Cyrus]

What is a ghost? Did they bother to ask, or do we just assume any definition that we like? Is that scientific?

Did they ask why people have these beliefs? Did they ask how many base their beliefs on personal experience, or do we just assume that all beliefs magically appear from the aether for no reason whatsoever? Is that a justified assumption? If so, prove it.

How many people today do we find clutching their crystals? And what does this have to do with exporting jobs? Are we to believe that globalization is the result of hippy rituals?

Why is it that we are losing jobs to nations rich in religious beliefs? Should we therefore conclude that America is failing because of atheism?

I thought China was mainly atheist.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I thought China was mainly atheist.

India, Mexico, South American countries...

also

There are five recognized religions by the state, namely Buddhism, Taoism, Islam, Catholicism, and Protestantism.[7]

In recent times the government has expressed support for Buddhism and Taoism, organizing the World Buddhist Forum in 2006 and the International Forum on the Daodejing in 2007. The government sees these religions as an integral part of Chinese culture[8].

In October 2007 the new statute of China cites religion as an important element of citizens' life.[9] However, the Chinese government has also banned religious cults such as the Falun Gong and Xiantianism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_China

 

[Cyrus]

India, Mexico, South American countries...

also



wiki

Thats one you never hear about anymore, eh? MEXICO. I think the reason is that China is taking the good jobs these days, even from places like mexico. But what does south america make, even the sweat shops are in china now!

If only we could follow the chinese and ban scientology.

 

[redargon]

I thought China was mainly atheist.

I thought the Chinese were mainly Buddhist. Is that the same as Atheist? Religion confuses me.

 

[Moridin]

i Thought The Chinese Were Mainly Buddhist. Is That The Same As Atheist? Religion Confuses Me.

(a (b))
~(r (a))

 

[jim mcnamara]

What is a ghost? Did they bother to ask, or do we just assume any definition that we like? Is that scientific?...

Since asking polling questions about topics that simply are 'how do you feel' is not necessarily science to start with, it is just 'what is your opinion?', and there is no definition that matches anything real, I don't see the problem. Similar to 'Do you believe in Angels?'


If you want to dispute it, swell. But the OP wanted to know the state of the degradation of science knowledge. This is one possible metric. And the fact that questions like that are taken seriously by 'pollees' is another, more depressing, metric.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Since asking polling questions about topics that simply are 'how do you feel' is not necessarily science to start with, it is just 'what is your opinion?', and there is no definition that matches anything real, I don't see the problem. Similar to 'Do you believe in Angels?'


If you want to dispute it, swell. But the OP wanted to know the state of the degradation of science knowledge. This is one possible metric. And the fact that questions like that are taken seriously by 'pollees' is another, more depressing, metric.

The entire context of this discussion is to make unjustified assumptions, generalizations, and to draw conclusions that can't be defended.

My wife and I experienced a "haunting". Now, I don't claim to know what it was that we experienced, but it was real. Did we have a ghost? I don't know what that means. I only know what happened. And to assume that this absolute reality is somehow a measure of mysticism and crystal chanting is completely bogus, and completely unscientific.

Many beliefs are based on observations and personal experience. One may choose to ignore this fact, but that is a leap of faith - a religious belief.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Critical thinking does not require that one deny what they know to be real - that is what cowards do.