weird science

[anotheranon]

Bush administration distorts science to fit agenda - no news here, and I'm sure that every political/social interest group does the same thing to further their own ends.

Interesting commentary from Daily Kos's article about the same issue, including lots of discussion about experts vs. people with degrees, the role of science journalism, and the poor state of science education got me thinking:

I never had a great foundation in the sciences, and was taught the subject more as as part of a particular discipline (biology, chemistry), rather than the basics of scientific proof, what is and isn't valid evidence, testing a theory, etc. and just bare bones logic.

Being interested in a lot of the weird things that I am (UFOs, ghosts, etc.), I've tried to stay objective - I've read Carl Sagan's "Demon Haunted World" and "How to Think About Weird Things" in order to get some idea of the flawed research out there, but can anyone recommend any books that lay out the "scientific mindset" for laypeople such as myself?

Comments

[jlsjlsjls.livejournal.com]

Dunno about "scientific mindset" as such, but if you want some fun (and accurate) science reading, try Stephen Jay Gould. His books are all compilations of his lengthy columns for Natural History magazine. Mainly science from the natural history viewpoint, but also does things like using baseball batting streaks to explain probability, looks at past (and sometimes no longer valid) scientific theories and discoveries within their historical context, and will investigate anything that rouses his curiosity (such as why we ended up with a QWERTY keyboard). The long essay format is perfect for somebody who has to snatch their reading in small bites.

Titles are:

Ever Since Darwin
The Panda's Thumb
Hen's Teeth and Horse's Toes
The Flamingo's Smile
Bully for Brontosaurus
Eight Little Piggies
Dinosaur in a Haystack
Leonardo's Mountain of Clams and the Diet of Worms
The Lying Stones of Marrakech
I Have Landed

Re:

[anotheranon.livejournal.com]

These titles sound familar - they might well be on the shelves in the basement. Thanks for the tip! :)

Re:

[jlsjlsjls.livejournal.com]

Now that WOULD be handy for you ... you don't even have to put on your shoes and go to the library :-))))))

Inmates running the asylum - -

[timcharmorbien.livejournal.com]

You only have to look at the frequent attempts to have evolution thrown out of school curriculums or presented as one of several 'alternate theories' to know that there are a lot of people in the United States who are at best indifferent to science, and at worst hostile towards any sort of scientific or intellectual endeavor. This is not helped by the shameless exploitation by politicians and corporations to further their own aims, including the suppression of any evidence that might prove inconvenient to profit or political ambition.
Americans as a whole seem historically indifferent to science, yet another reason why countries should not be founded or governed by hard working religious zealots who regard intellectuals as little better than heathens. Maybe if some of the people trying to halt the advance of science had been given a better education, they wouldn't be wasting so much time and tax dollars trying to impose their personal beliefs on the rest of us. :/

Re: Inmates running the asylum - -

[anotheranon.livejournal.com]

You make an excellent point about "indifference to science"; I think I often forget, given the people I hang out with who are well-read and intellectually curious that there are a lot - maybe a majority? - of people who just aren't interested in the pursuits of the mind.

I wonder whether it's genuine indifference, poor schooling, or just lack of time - it seems to me that much of modern life is consumed with running on a "hamster-wheel" of work in order to make ends meet/pay for the next fashion/technological/otherwise cool thing with little time left over to read or think.

I've heard that the reason Bush is popular with so many people is because he comes off as being "like them". That's really scary - both that many Americans identify with a blinded-by-religion, deeply incurious man, or that they are so intimidated by candidates percieved to be "intallectshual" that they vote against them.

(Note: I'm not slamming Bush/Republicans exclusively - I'm sure that scientific dishonesty is played at all ends of the political spectrum, but this administration seems particularly dismissive of the scientific method).