I am a scientist at heart. I love the spirit of inquiry, the spirit of creative exploration that comes with it! The true scientists doesn't take other people's observations at face value, but asks "how?" and "why?"
However, that is not the spirit in which science is being taught to millions of students and adults, the "congregation" of the religion of science. Sure, to "ask questions, discover, explore!" is paid lip-service, but is that really what is being taught?
Imagine, a child sitting down to a science test in grade school, writing down the "wrong" answer, and then telling the teacher that, based on his own observations, he doesn't believe the "current interpretation of the evidence" and believes his answer could be right.
What would that child be told? In most cases, I submit, this would be the response: "You are wrong. It has been scientifically proven."
Don't believe me? What would happen if you went into an elementary classroom and said that it was possible the dinosaurs did not in fact roam the earth, but that their presence in the archeaological record is due to our earth being comprised of the matter of other, extinct worlds, where dinosaurs had roamed? Does that fly in the face of current scientific "dogma," or what has been accepted as scientifically proven?
Dangerously powerful words, "scientifically proven." Words that teach to not question, but to accept...and to accept that which is so often proven wrong in a matter or years or even hours!
Think about it. What happens when a "ground-breaking new idea!" comes out in the field of science? Textbooks and tests world-wide are re-written, articles are published, and the scientific "facts" are changed...that easily. Scientists may understand and embrace the difference between theory and law, but that is not how it is presented. Millions accept anything "scientific" instantly as the latest "fact" in the religion of science. The "foundations" of science are so easily changed...and so faithfully believed.
That is what happened in 1935 when Japanese physicist Hideki Yukawa changed our currently accepted understanding of the atom. He challenged, interpreted, and creatively spun a new twist on an old theory and voila! New "truth" was found and mesons became part of our current model.
In a more personal example, I remember distinctly holding my first child in my arms 17 years ago and being firmly instructed by nurse clothed in the mantle of authority that I must, for the good of my baby, be very careful to clean her umbilical cord in a specific and regular manner.
Fast forward 12 years and I found myself in the same situation: cradling a new infant in my arms and being told firmly and authoritatively that I must not touch the umbilical cord in the best interest of my child.
It had been "scientifically proven" both times.
Now, don't get me wrong. Remember, I love science! I love the pursuit of truths and patterns in the world around me! However, I am concerned with how it is being taught to the public at large: theories as facts. As a grade schooler, I was taught "facts" about dinosaurs and evolution. In junior high and high school, the depth of indoctrination went deeper with "truths" and "facts" being taught and tested into me.
Lo and behold, I hit Yale University Evolution 260 and all of a sudden these "facts" become theories? Why was I not taught the problems with and options to radiocarbon dating? Why was I not clearly schooled in the difference between mirco-evolution (changes of a creature to adapt to their environment--well documented) and macro-evolution (the change from one species to another--never "documented")? How could I not see that the "evidence" for evolution of years past was the same small collection of bones, being re-discussed and re-visited with new sub-theories, with specimen so far and in between that they are individually named?
Remember, I call myself a scientist (although after reading this, I am sure some would love to differ :)...). I love discussing evolution and other scientific theories! I think it is exciting to consider possibilities! However, I am frustrated that those who would like to explore all possibilities of man and his origins and explanations for the world around us are shouted down as "religionists" and figuratively burned at the stake.
For instance, I just read the commentaries on an article titled "Creationism vs. Evolution" for a science class the other day--the commentaries, not so much of the article itself, ironically enough. Even if you don't understand everything they discuss in the commentaries, the mood is obvious. The words used to verbally attack those who tried to share the viewpoint of "creationism" (belief that God created the university) were similar to those I imagine used by the authorities of the Catholic Church who attacked Galileo and Copernicus...ironically enough. They were attacks based largely upon belief systems and not facts, from people indoctrinated in the "authority" of the "religion of science" that is currently preached and never questioned.
Interesting. The beliefs of the "religion of science" are questioned, but not the authority of it. Hmmm...an interesting riddle. Food for thought.
My purpose in writing this is to hopefully wake people up to what they are being taught through media and in the academic world, subconsciously and religiously: that science can prove anything and is the ultimate source of truth...science, which is built upon the observations and limited perception of imperfect people like you and I.
I celebrate science and what that field has discovered and how it has blessed my life. However, I do not believe everything that is "scientifically proven" at face value. Nor should we complacently accept what modern science demands of our children and the public at large: childlike faith and belief in anything it offers.
However, that is not the spirit in which science is being taught to millions of students and adults, the "congregation" of the religion of science. Sure, to "ask questions, discover, explore!" is paid lip-service, but is that really what is being taught?
Imagine, a child sitting down to a science test in grade school, writing down the "wrong" answer, and then telling the teacher that, based on his own observations, he doesn't believe the "current interpretation of the evidence" and believes his answer could be right.What would that child be told? In most cases, I submit, this would be the response: "You are wrong. It has been scientifically proven."
Don't believe me? What would happen if you went into an elementary classroom and said that it was possible the dinosaurs did not in fact roam the earth, but that their presence in the archeaological record is due to our earth being comprised of the matter of other, extinct worlds, where dinosaurs had roamed? Does that fly in the face of current scientific "dogma," or what has been accepted as scientifically proven?
Dangerously powerful words, "scientifically proven." Words that teach to not question, but to accept...and to accept that which is so often proven wrong in a matter or years or even hours!
Think about it. What happens when a "ground-breaking new idea!" comes out in the field of science? Textbooks and tests world-wide are re-written, articles are published, and the scientific "facts" are changed...that easily. Scientists may understand and embrace the difference between theory and law, but that is not how it is presented. Millions accept anything "scientific" instantly as the latest "fact" in the religion of science. The "foundations" of science are so easily changed...and so faithfully believed.
That is what happened in 1935 when Japanese physicist Hideki Yukawa changed our currently accepted understanding of the atom. He challenged, interpreted, and creatively spun a new twist on an old theory and voila! New "truth" was found and mesons became part of our current model.In a more personal example, I remember distinctly holding my first child in my arms 17 years ago and being firmly instructed by nurse clothed in the mantle of authority that I must, for the good of my baby, be very careful to clean her umbilical cord in a specific and regular manner.
Fast forward 12 years and I found myself in the same situation: cradling a new infant in my arms and being told firmly and authoritatively that I must not touch the umbilical cord in the best interest of my child.It had been "scientifically proven" both times.
Now, don't get me wrong. Remember, I love science! I love the pursuit of truths and patterns in the world around me! However, I am concerned with how it is being taught to the public at large: theories as facts. As a grade schooler, I was taught "facts" about dinosaurs and evolution. In junior high and high school, the depth of indoctrination went deeper with "truths" and "facts" being taught and tested into me.
Remember, I call myself a scientist (although after reading this, I am sure some would love to differ :)...). I love discussing evolution and other scientific theories! I think it is exciting to consider possibilities! However, I am frustrated that those who would like to explore all possibilities of man and his origins and explanations for the world around us are shouted down as "religionists" and figuratively burned at the stake.
For instance, I just read the commentaries on an article titled "Creationism vs. Evolution" for a science class the other day--the commentaries, not so much of the article itself, ironically enough. Even if you don't understand everything they discuss in the commentaries, the mood is obvious. The words used to verbally attack those who tried to share the viewpoint of "creationism" (belief that God created the university) were similar to those I imagine used by the authorities of the Catholic Church who attacked Galileo and Copernicus...ironically enough. They were attacks based largely upon belief systems and not facts, from people indoctrinated in the "authority" of the "religion of science" that is currently preached and never questioned.
Interesting. The beliefs of the "religion of science" are questioned, but not the authority of it. Hmmm...an interesting riddle. Food for thought.My purpose in writing this is to hopefully wake people up to what they are being taught through media and in the academic world, subconsciously and religiously: that science can prove anything and is the ultimate source of truth...science, which is built upon the observations and limited perception of imperfect people like you and I.
I celebrate science and what that field has discovered and how it has blessed my life. However, I do not believe everything that is "scientifically proven" at face value. Nor should we complacently accept what modern science demands of our children and the public at large: childlike faith and belief in anything it offers.
So true. Thanks for sharing.
ReplyDeleteThat is an incredible presentation about the topic. I, too, love science and love your points. Speaking of science as religion, I think of those promoting Theory as truth as being the "priestcraft" of that religion. They often are promoting themselves rather than the true value of science and the power of discovery. Thanks for your wonderful insights!
ReplyDeleteWhat an intersting way to think of it...priestcraft! Wow. That adds a new dimension!
DeleteYour umbilical story reminded me of a very similar story. I'm the hospital after baby 5 or 6 I was told you don't have to nurse both sides, that "new research" shows you can do one side per feeding. How long have women been doing that? Taking to my aunt after she had been down visiting her daughter and first grandchild, she said baby seemed to want to eat all the time, just hungry. I mentioned what the nurse had told me, and she said yes, same thing. My aunt tried to fix it, but being a new mom, my cousin wanted to listen to the "authority" instead of her mother who had raised 8 children. She's got 3 kids now. I wonder if anything changed.
ReplyDeleteIsn't it interesting! Yes, I have other similar experiences. I value what people and research has to offer, but love to take it and then do what feels right with it. After all, you can find a study to prove anything :).
Delete