enter the fray: our reader discussion forum
Search in:
Advanced
View:FlatThreaded
BA's top 10 reasons for US science cogntive dissonance
by baltimore aureole

10 - US educated scientists have won the vast majority of nobel prizes in science and medicine

9 - America's public schoolkids are bested by most of europe and many 3rd world countries when it comes to math and science testing

8 - We're the first country to put a man on the moon. In 1969, before the PC had been invented

7 - We invented PCs, too. And the MacIntonsh. And Windows. And Leopard operating systems .

6 - US College graduates with "education" degrees have the lowest average SAT score of any college major - any

5 - You never hear of US spies being accused of stealing scientific secrets from Russia, China, or any other nation

4 - I once worked in California. 50 yards from the back of my office building was an earthquake fault. Giant chasm. The people in my building - most of whom had lived in california for many years, were totally unaware it was an earthquake fault line. They thought it was just a beautiful valley with birds and flowers

3 - Russia claims to have invented television. China's last great invention was gunpowder. Their current schtick is patent infringement. India HAS invented an urban car that runs on compressed air - it gets 90 miles to the tankkful (of air).

2 - If you ask a typical US high school student if he would like to be an engineer in college, he'll think you mean driving a locomotive, and ask how fast bullet trains go. Actually US locomotive engineers apparently find texting and pot use irresistable on the job

1 - Other than price, would you travel to another country for specialty medical help? Geez - why not?

Re: BA's top 10 reasons for US science cogntive dissonance
by EbenCooke

Well, I wouldn't want to brag about Windows. And you'd probably be astonished to learn how much of our computer development has been done by Indians, Chinese, Japanese computer scientists. Quite a lot of the early theoretical work (actual science, as opposed to technology) was done by British thinkers.

But, sure. There's really no argument that the USA has been a leader in the development of computer and space technology. Whether it's maintaining that lead is another question.

I, too, am critical of our schools of education. But how, exactly, does this reflect on the way "science" is perceived by Americans? I doubt there are that many scientists out there whose degrees are in Education.

The term "engineer" has morphed quite a lot over the years. I believe it originated in the early industrial revolution, when a person who could manage the steam engines of the day must've seemed as awesome to the public as today's "rocket scientists". But engineering and science are pretty distinct disciplines nowadays.

Re: BA's top 10 reasons for US science cogntive dissonance
by MikeyD

To quote an aphorism on another topic entirely, 'All cats have green eyes in the dark'. The majority of American can not distinguish 'serious' science from popular science. The latest paperback on crystal healing is given as much scientific weight as a paper on molecular biology... with the larger problem that the paper on molecular biology has zero change of ever being widely read while the crystal healing book will be in the front window of every B. Daltons in the nation. This inability to differentiate wheat from chaff leads to false equivalents, that 'reasoning A' is as good as 'reasoning B' regardless of the large proportion of fairy dust contained in 'reasoning B'.

America is turning into a stratefied society. The rabble don't trust the elitists and the elites are contemptuous of the rabble. American triumphalism over our 'great accomplishments' is more than a decade out of date. We've been sliding down a slippery slope for awhile.

And yes, people do flee this country for medical help overseas these days.

Wndows runs on 90% of the world's PCs
by baltimore aureole

whats your point?

that all software must be bug free - and if its not, its crap?

are you coder, or one of those people who calls the support desk because you can find your manual?

i would argue that america is LESS stratified these days
by baltimore aureole

my rationale . . .

- more kids attend, and graduate from, college than at any time

- the share of workers on the farm has fallen over the years from 50% to less than 5%

- repetitive and dangerous factory jobs have been automated through robotics, or gleefully appropriated by 3rd world nations

- more people than ever work at "knowledge" jobs - the sit at a desk and have PCs and other modern tools at their disposal

- nutrition, lifespan, and public health in america have never been higher

- the past 50 years (since the civil rights marches of the 1960's) have seen huges advances in voting rights, and representation by minorities in congress

i could go on, but i don't want to let facts get in the way of anyone's preconceptions.

Re: i would argue that america is LESS stratified these days
by Konrad

I am an elitie and I look down on you as part of the rabble. None of your statements, even if they are true, are proof that these is less stratification, with respect to the understanding of science, than in the past.

It is very easy to graduate from college without taking any science classes, and it is even easier to ignore what you have learned if it conflicts from your belief system.

You can be just as scientifically ignorant in a city as on a farm.

Sitting at a desk in front of a computer does not make a person scientifically literate. Ask an HR drone about the scientific method.

Living longer does not make people smarter or better educated. There are millions of old stupid people throughout the US.

Civil Rights has nothing to do with scientific literacy, neither does being in Congress.

Re: i would argue that america is LESS stratified these days
by bsharporflat
Okay, Herr Konrad...and what does all this have to do with Amerika?
Re: i would argue that america is LESS stratified these days
by EbenCooke

As for "scientific literacy", I'd hope to see more Americans get a grip on the most essential concepts, such as:

What IS "science"? (hint: it's not a simple compendium of "all the facts"; and, yes, it does include quite a lot of speculation)

What does the word "theory" mean in science?

What do "prove" and "proof" mean in science? (hint: different meanings for different realms of science)

What role does "belief" or "faith" play in advancing scientific knowledge?

BA, I'd look into those claims about the "air car".
by Tundrayeti

They're utter BS... We didn't devote much time to reviewing compressed air... and our main focus was grid energy storage, but our brief write-up on compressed air includes a small refutation of the claims of the mythical "air car".

<link>

Otherwise, an interesting top ten... giving something to think about.

However, looking at the dominance in technology... I have to ask, what is the most recent great thing that was invented by America?

We used to be the gods of science... but we're falling short these days, and that's frightening.

Re: BA's top 10 reasons for US science cogntive dissonance
by magdalena_
Yeah, I agree. Except one question: the inability to differentiate wheat from chaff is not a phenomenon that is specific to the U.S. But the difference between the U.S. and many other countires (especially developing countries and transition economies) is that the U.S. has strong elites while the latter do not (few or very few people of high calibre remain, which means that that they lack some critical mass to impose change and very often operate under unfavorable conditions and are degraded by know-nothing people)
QUANTITY IS NOT QUALITY
by magdalena_

Let's be serious!

More kids graduate? So what? Does it mean that education is better? I heard a little bit about U.S. edu system, but I surely don't know it as well as Western European schools. Well,in general, they are catastrophic, including lecturers, who often don't distinguish the cat from the dog but have some florid scientific titles. Nobody who has no experience of it could believe what it means. Honestly, I had much better teachers at primary school than many, many lecturers in Western universities. The Western strength lies only in a handful of good schools, and at such schools you can FIND good lecturers and open, beautiful minds. But that's sufficient, which doesn't mean that it's an optimal system.

View as RSS news feed in XML