ISEN-ASTC-L Archives

Informal Science Education Network

ISEN-ASTC-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Charlie Carlson <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informal Science Education Network <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 2 Mar 2011 19:47:24 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (90 lines)
ISEN-ASTC-L is a service of the Association of Science-Technology Centers
Incorporated, a worldwide network of science museums and related institutions.
*****************************************************************************

This argument is a stand in for consistency of belief and whether or not it's essential.  I call your attention to a talk at the recent AAAS.  A school of fish depends more upon blind acceptance rather than individual decision making based upon a broad degree of sensory input and independent behavior.  Not that the match is perfect,  but we may discovering our inner fish in both cases.
C

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 2, 2011, at 12:08 PM, Jack W Cannon <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> ISEN-ASTC-L is a service of the Association of Science-Technology Centers
> Incorporated, a worldwide network of science museums and related institutions.
> *****************************************************************************
> 
> Thanks Again Jennie and Jamie,
> 
> Let me offer an alternative explanation to the apparent propensity of people being more willing to agree with something framed as a scientific theory or technical issue.
> 
> Let me also use the example that Jamie provided.
> 
> 74% marked true for the following statement, "according to the theory of evolution, human beings, as we know them today, developed from earlier species of animals", but only 44% marked true when the phrase, "according to the theory of evolution" was omitted.
> 
> Suppose I was a die-hard fundamentalist who believed that a completely literal interpretation of the book of Genesis was the absolute basis of all knowledge.  I would mark "False" for the statement, "Human beings, as we know them today, developed from earlier species of animals".
> 
> Now let us also suppose that I read the alternative question very carefully. It starts with the phrase, "according to the theory of evolution".  I would then mark it "True".  NOT because the question is framed as a scientific theory or technical issue and NOT because I believe in evolution but because I believe that the theory of evolution makes such a claim.
> 
> The same can be said of my neighbor's house falling down.  I may not believe that my neighbor's house may fall down but I may believe that the engineering reports state that it may.
> 
> I certainly do not know if such a critical interpretation of the question is valid or not but I do like to think that if I were in such a position I would respond to the questions as I just detailed.
> 
> Jack Cannon
> 
> -----Original Message----- From: Jennie Dusheck
> Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2011 11:26 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Creationists as proponents of academic freedom
> 
> ISEN-ASTC-L is a service of the Association of Science-Technology Centers
> Incorporated, a worldwide network of science museums and related institutions.
> *****************************************************************************
> 
> At 12:09 PM -0500 3/2/11, Alonzo, Jamie wrote:
>> These differences probably indicate that many Americans hold religious beliefs that cause them to be skeptical of established scientific ideas, even when they have some basic familiarity with those ideas."
> 
> An additional explanation is that people are more willing to agree
> with something framed as a scientific theory or technical issue.
> 
> E.g., "My neighbor's house may fall down next year." versus
> "According to engineering reports, my neighbor's house may fall down
> next year."
> 
> I'm postulating that more people would agree with the second statement.
> Jennie Dusheck
> 
> ***********************************************************************
> For information about the Association of Science-Technology Centers and the Informal Science Education Network please visit www.astc.org.
> 
> Check out the latest case studies and reviews on ExhibitFiles at www.exhibitfiles.org.
> 
> The ISEN-ASTC-L email list is powered by LISTSERVR software from L-Soft. To learn more, visit
> http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html.
> 
> To remove your e-mail address from the ISEN-ASTC-L list, send the
> message  SIGNOFF ISEN-ASTC-L in the BODY of a message to
> [log in to unmask] 
> ***********************************************************************
> For information about the Association of Science-Technology Centers and the Informal Science Education Network please visit www.astc.org.
> 
> Check out the latest case studies and reviews on ExhibitFiles at www.exhibitfiles.org.
> 
> The ISEN-ASTC-L email list is powered by LISTSERVR software from L-Soft. To learn more, visit
> http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html.
> 
> To remove your e-mail address from the ISEN-ASTC-L list, send the
> message  SIGNOFF ISEN-ASTC-L in the BODY of a message to
> [log in to unmask]

***********************************************************************
For information about the Association of Science-Technology Centers and the Informal Science Education Network please visit www.astc.org.

Check out the latest case studies and reviews on ExhibitFiles at www.exhibitfiles.org.

The ISEN-ASTC-L email list is powered by LISTSERVR software from L-Soft. To learn more, visit
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html.

To remove your e-mail address from the ISEN-ASTC-L list, send the
message  SIGNOFF ISEN-ASTC-L in the BODY of a message to
[log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2