Science vs. Pseudoscience
Posted: 09 April 2006 10:11 PM   [ Ignore ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  268
Joined  2006-02-08

How Can Science Defend Itself Against Those Who Promote Pseudoscience?
 
In an article appearing in an issue of the journal "Science" I read that the American Association for the Advancement of Science’s Board of Directors passed a resolution urging the public to oppose the teaching of "Intelligent Design Theory" (ID theory) in the nation’s classrooms. The resolution states that the concept has not been supported by "credible scientific evidence".
The AAAS urges it’s members to "assist those engaged in overseeing science education policy to understand the nature of science, the contents of contemporary evolutionary theory and the inappropriateness of intelligent design theory as subject matter for science education"
I think the reason why theories like ID and creationism are accepted by so many is because most people don’t understand what science is and how it works. This is because most people aren’t interested in science. Most are interested in family, religion, politics, sports, in being entertained and those who entertain them. Most couldn’t care less about what’s behind the technologies that provide them with so many modern conveniences—namely, scientific research and experimentation.
It seems that the task before us is getting more and more people interested in science. But how do we go about doing that? I don’t have the answer to that question. Maybe those of us who are interested in it should start giving more thought to how this is to be accomplished.
In the meantime, pseudosciences like ID and creationism will continually appear and their supporters will try to force them into the science classrooms—claiming that they are as valid as the legitimate sciences. If the supporters of these theories have their way the teaching of real science will suffer. And, being confused, students will not get the science education they will need to live and prosper in the modern world. For it is science that has created the modern world and not theological concepts.
Bob

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 April 2006 10:11 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  268
Joined  2006-02-08

Science vs. Pseudoscience

How Can Science Defend Itself Against Those Who Promote Pseudoscience?
 
In an article appearing in an issue of the journal “Science” I read that the American Association for the Advancement of Science’s Board of Directors passed a resolution urging the public to oppose the teaching of “Intelligent Design Theory” (ID theory) in the nation’s classrooms. The resolution states that the concept has not been supported by “credible scientific evidence”.
The AAAS urges it’s members to “assist those engaged in overseeing science education policy to understand the nature of science, the contents of contemporary evolutionary theory and the inappropriateness of intelligent design theory as subject matter for science education”
I think the reason why theories like ID and creationism are accepted by so many is because most people don’t understand what science is and how it works. This is because most people aren’t interested in science. Most are interested in family, religion, politics, sports, in being entertained and those who entertain them. Most couldn’t care less about what’s behind the technologies that provide them with so many modern conveniences—namely, scientific research and experimentation.
It seems that the task before us is getting more and more people interested in science. But how do we go about doing that? I don’t have the answer to that question. Maybe those of us who are interested in it should start giving more thought to how this is to be accomplished.
In the meantime, pseudosciences like ID and creationism will continually appear and their supporters will try to force them into the science classrooms—claiming that they are as valid as the legitimate sciences. If the supporters of these theories have their way the teaching of real science will suffer. And, being confused, students will not get the science education they will need to live and prosper in the modern world. For it is science that has created the modern world and not theological concepts.
Bob

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 April 2006 07:59 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  47
Joined  2006-03-29

What people fear most is science for the sake of science or science gone mad.

People need assurances science is under control of those authorities which hold on to as you wrote; Most are interested in family, religion, politics, sports, in being entertained and those who entertain them

Can science progress to elevate the conscience awareness of mandkind?
I think so, slowly and gradually, with human values in mind.

 Signature 

The sound made of a tree falling when no one is there….. is Thought Adjusted.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 July 2006 09:32 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  21
Joined  2006-04-27

Education and activism.

I think, CyotoSon, that you just defined yourself as a humanist. WATCH OUT!!!

 Signature 

Our love of what is beautiful does not lead to extravagance; our love of things of the mind does not make us soft.—Thucydides, Book II

Profile