Tag: Anti_anti_intellectualism

Illuminating Science

Thanks Richard Smith for this timely reminder about science and science communication. In addition to the events you mentioned, the recent legal action in Italy involving scientist and the earthquake also warrants some edification.

Part of the mission of  ScienceSunday is to reach out to the general population on G+ and explain what is real science. Of course we have fun with jokes, puns, and memes. However, we want people to have a place where they can ask questions and learn about real science. We want a place where we can explain why something might be pseudoscience. Finally, we want to share our passion for science and hope to encourage others to join our passion for science.

Here are a few of my posts that are related to either correcting pseudoscience or bad science related journalism.

Bad science → bad headlines

http://goo.gl/epcnr 

Overselling preclinical results – Orac

http://goo.gl/oe4mg

Analysis of Meta-analysis

http://goo.gl/xaG99  

Alarming science discovery…

http://goo.gl/sLjT5

the idea of the contradiction comes from what I see as the deepest misunderstanding about science, which is the idea that science is about certainty.

http://goo.gl/0e7p7

If you are interested in science, circle ScienceSunday  and watch for   #ScienceEveryday  when it isn’t   #ScienceSunday

#Anti_anti_intellectualism

Originally shared by Richard Smith-Unna

Science as a candle in the dark; our responsibility as scientists

Today for ScienceSunday I want to take a moment to talk about something serious.

Anti-science and irrationality have a strong hold in the modern world. Political, religious and cultural values often conflict with what science tells us, and lead to situations which are not just intellectually frustrating, but in the worst cases lead to people’s lives being put at risk.

As an example, the NHS in the UK currently funds four homeopathic hospitals (http://goo.gl/8qSzX, to learn why homeopathy is a problem: http://1023.org.uk).  It’s not just sad, it tears at the fabric of my intellectual being to see my country treating people with such distain.

At the same time, we see the scientific method being abused to oppose GM agriculture; a group of technologies which have the potential to avert future food crises and eventually provide food security for the whole world (http://goo.gl/Q0J4o).

And even within the scientific community, we have recently seen that chauvinism and discrimination are serious problems (http://goo.gl/OdHFW).

In each case, we as members of the science-supporting public or the scientific community can do something to address the problem. More than that – it’s our responsibility to do so.

We can make our voices heard, invest our time and effort in expelling mysticism and ignorance. When we see abuses, we can expose them. We can collectively discuss and hone our methods of communication and argumentation. We can join forces to have a greater impact, and to support each other when the incessant battle gets demoralising. I don’t have the solution, but we do.

The problem is that it’s difficult and demoralising to talk to someone who is anti-science. How do you deal with irrationality? How do you debate with someone whose world view rejects evidence for dogma? Please discuss.

This was inspired by Buddhini Samarasinghe’s post: http://goo.gl/o9bC5. ScienceSunday is curated by Rajini Rao, Chad Haney, Robby Bowles, and Allison Sekuler.

#sciencesunday   #scienceeveryday

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3OZz-vgAjY

Logic with False Premises and Cherry Picking

This is so WIN. I ♥ this discussion.

Eugenie Scott, in an interview with Liza Gross, talks about cherry picking data by anti-science folks and using logic with a false premise (anomalies). She also discusses how there are dichotomies setup (false ones) that make it difficult to reach the people that might not be anti-science.

Regarding anti-vaxxers, Scott had this to say To understand this phenomenon you really have to dig deeper into what is motivating people. First of all, I’d like to distinguish between the people who lead these movements versus the people who follow them. They’re not the ones generating the vaccine anomaly, so to speak, but they’ve read this literature and they’re parroting what they’ve heard. And your heart goes out to them. They’re concerned about their children. They don’t want their kids to get sick. But as many admit, they don’t fully understand the science. And your decisions are obviously going to be influenced by your emotions. We’re human beings, not automatons. But you need to temper them with good information, empirical information, dare I say scientific information, in order to make the best decisions.

Since people liked it, I’m adding this quote from my profile page:

There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that “my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.”

     Isaac Asimov, column in Newsweek (21 January 1980)

#Anti_anti_intellectualism

Big h/t to Liza Gross 

#ScienceEveryday  when it isn’t #ScienceSunday

Originally shared by Liza Gross

How to deal with science denialists? Talk to America’s No. 1 science defender:   cc ScienceSunday 

Still anti-medicine?

There are some people that comment that modern medicine is bad. Certainly it isn’t perfect; nothing is. To say that it is all bad is silly, in my opinion. For the anti-vaxxers, there’s a whole list of diseases that we’ve eradicated due to vaccinations. The NPR piece linked helps drive home the point.

A change came when, in 1995, the first triple-drug combinations became available, Lennox says. He saw an amazing transformation take place, where people who were on their deathbed were discharged within a month.

“It was the most amazing thing and it still is,” he says. “We still get people who come in at the end stages of AIDS and if we catch them in time, many of them are restored to normal health.” [Dr. Jeffrey Lennox]

#ScienceEveryday  when it isn’t #ScienceSunday  

#Anti_anti_intellectualism

http://www.npr.org/2012/07/22/157199216/testing-treatment-key-weapons-in-aids-fight