TRB8985
- 74
- 15
Good morning all,
I wanted to get some opinions on the following situation. Feel free to share.
I often encounter pages on social media such as Facebook where channel owners/moderators label themselves as "scientists" (without any kind of academic degree) or as people "doing science" without using any kind of numbers or mathematics or anything with any *real* explanatory power whatsoever. Usually posts on these channels involve sharing interesting pictures and writing 10-20-30 paragraphs of a cliffnotes-like explanation with a smörgåsbord of unrelated philosophy thrown in for good measure.
I used to ask these channel owners/moderators why they considered themselves as such, whereas a label of "science communicator" seems much more highly appropriate. However, I learned that doing so is somehow tantamount to an insult (which I don't understand why), so I don't frequent them as often as I do my textbooks.
I guess I'm curious as to whether I'm just splitting hairs, or there's actually a problem on these social media channels. As for myself, I was particularly influenced by the following quote in the beginning of my undergraduate career:
"I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind; it may be the beginning of knowledge, but you have scarcely, in your thoughts, advanced to the stage of science, whatever the matter may be."
- Lord Kelvin
I've come to completely agree with Lord Kelvin's words (and also, Richard Feynmann's), as I've noticed in my own life that scientific explanations without numbers/mathematics are like stringed instruments without strings. But perhaps this comes from my own underpinnings as a theoretician-in-training.
What do you guys think?
I wanted to get some opinions on the following situation. Feel free to share.
I often encounter pages on social media such as Facebook where channel owners/moderators label themselves as "scientists" (without any kind of academic degree) or as people "doing science" without using any kind of numbers or mathematics or anything with any *real* explanatory power whatsoever. Usually posts on these channels involve sharing interesting pictures and writing 10-20-30 paragraphs of a cliffnotes-like explanation with a smörgåsbord of unrelated philosophy thrown in for good measure.
I used to ask these channel owners/moderators why they considered themselves as such, whereas a label of "science communicator" seems much more highly appropriate. However, I learned that doing so is somehow tantamount to an insult (which I don't understand why), so I don't frequent them as often as I do my textbooks.
I guess I'm curious as to whether I'm just splitting hairs, or there's actually a problem on these social media channels. As for myself, I was particularly influenced by the following quote in the beginning of my undergraduate career:
"I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind; it may be the beginning of knowledge, but you have scarcely, in your thoughts, advanced to the stage of science, whatever the matter may be."
- Lord Kelvin
I've come to completely agree with Lord Kelvin's words (and also, Richard Feynmann's), as I've noticed in my own life that scientific explanations without numbers/mathematics are like stringed instruments without strings. But perhaps this comes from my own underpinnings as a theoretician-in-training.
What do you guys think?