- #31
PhDeezNutz
- 851
- 561
WWGD said:
Oh man!! By dispelling things no one actually thinks?
When Pro Scientists Explain Using Pop Science
Click For Summary
Discussion Overview
The discussion centers on the role of professional scientists in popularizing science, particularly through media and public engagement. It explores the implications of this practice for both the scientific community and the public's understanding of complex scientific concepts, touching on themes of communication, interdisciplinary insights, and the balance between entertainment and education.
Discussion Character
- Debate/contested
- Conceptual clarification
- Meta-discussion
Main Points Raised
- Some participants note that popular science (Pop Sci) can be beneficial in sparking interest in science among the public, while also acknowledging its downsides.
- Concerns are raised about the potential negative impact of popularization on the credibility of scientists, citing Carl Sagan's experiences with the National Academy of Sciences as an example.
- There is a contention regarding the extent to which scientists from one field can have insights into another, with some arguing that significant education and experience in a different field can lead to valid insights.
- Others counter that the divisions between fields, such as applied and pure mathematics or physics and mathematics, are substantial enough to limit cross-disciplinary insights.
- Participants discuss the definition of "insight" and its implications for understanding between different scientific disciplines.
- Some express frustration over perceived vagueness in arguments and call for clearer definitions and examples to support claims about interdisciplinary knowledge.
Areas of Agreement / Disagreement
Participants express a mix of agreement and disagreement regarding the value and limitations of popular science communication, as well as the nature of insights across different scientific fields. The discussion remains unresolved, with competing views on the extent of interdisciplinary understanding among scientists.
Contextual Notes
Participants highlight the complexity of defining "fields" and "insight," indicating that these terms may depend on context and personal experience. There are also references to the social dynamics within the scientific community that influence perceptions of popularization efforts.
Oh man!! By dispelling things no one actually thinks?
- #32
- 20,815
- 28,452
I have tried to avoid any bashing of specific persons in my article. Of course, I, too, had the usual suspects in mind and named some of them - hopefully without any judgments. One has always to keep in mind whom they address, by which media channel, and at what time of the day. All these factors are normally disregarded when it comes to discussions like the one that evolved here right now. It is easy to criticize those who actually do something instead of taking action instead. I had to learn this myself recently. I drew the personal consequence of reducing my activities at PF drastically. If they are considered "meaningless" then it's time to stop them. Fortunately, none of the mentioned scientists are members here AFAIK.
This thread is closed now.
This thread is closed now.
Similar threads
- · Replies 1 ·
- · Replies 6 ·
- · Replies 28 ·
High School
Debunking Alleged proofs against modern science
- · Replies 1 ·
- · Replies 4 ·
- · Replies 16 ·
- · Replies 1 ·
- · Replies 14 ·