This book still continues to amaze me. The statistics that they give are astonishing. I can't believe that 80 percent of Americans can't read the New York Times science section. Is it because it doesn't make sense or all they just not interested in learning about the changing world? "Only half of the adult populace knows the earth orbits the sun once per year." I thought that was common knowledge but I was proven wrong.
A quote that stood out to me most while reading was "We need a nation in which science has far more prominence in politics and the media, far more relevance to the life of every American, far more intersections with other walks of life, and ultimately, far more influence where it truly matters.." I thought this was a great quote because it states how more people need to get involved in order to understand science and help their life in general. Science needs to be broadcasted more so individuals have a chance to learn but even when they do have a chance like the New York Times science section they just overlook it.
I feel like over time science hasn't got the fame it deserves. Scientists during the period of World War II got a lot of fame because they made crucial wartime technologies that helped. Now since scientists don't help with coming up with things since they are already made then they don't get the publicity they deserve. People don't understand how science affect there lives everyday. After reading this book, I now understand that science is a big impact on our lives and most people have no idea anything about science unless it relates to them on a personal level. Obviously, science relates to them but if they are affected by it they don't care.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
To be fair, the New York Times is pretty dense. All joking aside, I agree with your point that science does not have the recognition it deserves. It's almost like a cycle where scientists fail to communicate because they think the public will not be receptive, the public (who votes for legislators who determine the budgets of government research agencies) then feels that science is both incomprehensible and superfluous ignore it and spit out shocking statistics like what you quoted when asked, which in turn makes the science community turn its back on the public who appear both ignorant and unwilling to learn, thus cementing the popular perception of scientific elitism and unapproachability in the public and the cycle keeps on going. I feel like I have said this many times in comments on this blog and in discussions with Mr. Goldberg but the key to breaking this cycle and making science a cornerstone of American life once more is communication. Scientists need to be more effective communicators because the public will not suddenly take the initiative to go learn about biochemistry or quantum mechanics on their own, and therefore it is difficult for the public to really see the value of research. For science to be relevant again to the American people, science needs to regain its voice or at least make an effort to create science "ambassadors" like the late Carl Sagan, who managed to reach a massive audience with his books and Cosmos.
Post a Comment