3 ms·

> Some factors may act as obstacles to the acceptance of evolution, such as religion, a lack of openness to experience, and not understanding the nature of scie

> Some factors may act as obstacles to the acceptance of evolution, such as religion, a lack of openness to experience, and not understanding the nature of science Maybe this is just by bias but so often I see "listen to us, not them" as some kind of argument for why to believe in something, and I think the tone of this study feels similar. What about the idea that we should question stuff and not go down the "science tells us" faith based path. What if the same underlying factors that might cause someone to believe unquestioningly in biblical creation are the same that could lead to someone believing unquestioningly in evolution. And likewise, what if being more of a skeptic causes people to reject, or at least moderate their opinion, on both. I don't go in for "teaching the controversy" per se, but I do support a less faith based approach to education, which includes encouraging people not to blindly accept "science". My read is there has been a massive religious shift in that direction

moate 4y ago
I agree, scientific literacy is the problem. Too many people see Science as a replacement for religion and just say things like "trust the science" or act as if "science" is a noun that means things it doesn't. "We used science to prove our point" doesn't man a damn thing to me unless I've read the study. The thing about the scientific method, is that it replaces faith, and people don't know what to do with that. Most people, even on the science side (myself included) just trust that "the science checks out" in the same way people just trust that "the Bible was written using divine influence outside the corruption of mortal man". TL;dr- Teach critical thinking, which is the backbone of the scientific method, so above all else and hope for the best. Critical thinking is very hard, especially when you're not an expert on a matter, and that's the problem we can't ever solve: Nobody can be interested in everything enough to actually investigate it, even tough many of the things they're not investigating are extremely important to their lives.
- mbg721 4y ago
  The Mythbusters had it right; the difference between science and screwing around is paying attention and writing it down.

moate 4y ago

I agree, scientific literacy is the problem. Too many people see Science as a replacement for religion and just say things like "trust the science" or act as if "science" is a noun that means things it doesn't. "We used science to prove our point" doesn't man a damn thing to me unless I've read the study. The thing about the scientific method, is that it replaces faith, and people don't know what to do with that. Most people, even on the science side (myself included) just trust that "the science checks out" in the same way people just trust that "the Bible was written using divine influence outside the corruption of mortal man". TL;dr- Teach critical thinking, which is the backbone of the scientific method, so above all else and hope for the best. Critical thinking is very hard, especially when you're not an expert on a matter, and that's the problem we can't ever solve: Nobody can be interested in everything enough to actually investigate it, even tough many of the things they're not investigating are extremely important to their lives.

mbg721 4y ago
The Mythbusters had it right; the difference between science and screwing around is paying attention and writing it down.