WORTH THINKING ABOUT: THE SORRY STATE OF SCIENCE EDUCATION

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: Dewayne Hendricks <dewayne () warpspeed com>
Date: July 7, 2004 11:46:41 AM EDT
To: Dewayne-Net Technology List <dewayne-net () warpspeed com>
Subject: [Dewayne-Net] WORTH THINKING ABOUT: THE SORRY STATE OF SCIENCE  
EDUCATION
Reply-To: dewayne () warpspeed com

WORTH THINKING ABOUT: THE SORRY STATE OF SCIENCE EDUCATION

     Culture critic Neil Postman decried the shallow state of science
education in this age so dependent on the technological fruits of  
science:
     "From the point of view of the ascent of humanity, the scientific
enterprise is one of our most glorious achievements. Would it be an
exaggeration to say that not one student in fifty knows what 'induction'
means? Or knows what a scientific theory is? 0r a scientific model? Or  
knows
what are the optimum conditions of a valid scientific experiment? Or has
ever considered the question of what scientific truth is? In 'The  
Identity
of Man' Bronowski says the following: 'This is the paradox of  
imagination in
science, that it has for its aim the impoverishment of imagination. By  
that
outrageous phrase, I mean that the highest flight of scientific  
imagination
is to weed out the proliferation of new ideas. In science, the grand  
view is
a miserly view, and a rich model of the universe is one which is as  
poor as
possible in hypotheses.'
     "Is there one student in a hundred who can make any sense out of  
this
statement? Though the phrase 'impoverishment of imagination' may be
outrageous, there is nothing startling or even unusual about the idea
contained in this quotation. Every practicing scientist understands what
Bronowski is saying. Yet it is kept a secret from our students. It  
should be
revealed. In addition to having each course include a serious historical
dimension, I would propose that every school -- elementary through  
college
-- offer and require a course in the philosophy of science. Such a  
course
should consider the language of science, the nature of scientific  
proof, the
source of scientific hypotheses, the role of imagination, the  
conditions of
experimentation, and especially the value of error and disproof. If I  
am not
mistaken, many still believe that what makes a statement scientific is  
that
it can be verified. In fact, exactly the opposite is the case: What
separates scientific statements from nonscientific statements is that  
the
former can be subjected to the test of falsifiability. What makes  
science
possible is not our ability to recognize 'truth' but our ability to
recognize falsehood."
     [See
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0679745408/newsscancom/ 
ref=nos
im Neil Postman's "Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology,
Vintage" -- or look for it in your favorite library.


Archives at: <http://Wireless.Com/Dewayne-Net>
Weblog at: <http://weblog.warpspeed.com>

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/