Re: [asa] Scientists, Religion, and Politics

Heya Mike,

As I said, I have no idea whether this complaint is valid nor have I dug
into it too deeply. Just repeating a common complaint I see floating around
that I thought may be of interest. I don't even know what proportion of
scientists at large join the AAAS. (Or even what definition of "scientist"
Pew was using. I wonder if psychologists and economists count? They do
mention social sciences & policy, so I'd assume so.)

Reading through the poll, what mostly stands out to me is the tremendous
representation of those from the "biological/medical" discipline. 51%, with
the next closest being chemistry at 14%. Along with the number employed by a
university/college. Neither of those are necessarily criticisms of the poll,
mind you - just "huh, interesting".

On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 12:33 AM, Nucacids <nucacids@wowway.com> wrote:

> Lame complaint. It's common for many scientists to join AAAS, the
> largest general scientific society, just to get their subscription to
> Science. There is no evidence to think AAAS members are any different from
> non-AAAS members.
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> *From:* Schwarzwald <schwarzwald@gmail.com>
> *To:* asa@calvin.edu
> *Sent:* Thursday, July 16, 2009 12:00 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [asa] Scientists, Religion, and Politics
>
> Incidentally, with regards to the original poll: One complaint I'm hearing
> is that Pew didn't poll scientists generally, but specifically members of
> the AAAS. Which is apparently a rather politically active organization? I
> honestly am not too familiar with them, but I thought those of us who read
> the poll with interest may want to check up on this and decide for
> themselves if it taints the poll in any way.
>
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 9:38 PM, Freeman, Louise Margaret <
> lfreeman@mbc.edu> wrote:
>
>> Well put, Randy. My pastor was preaching on Romans 3:4 "God forbid: yea,
>> let God be true, but every man a liar" last week and made an anti-evolution
>> dig, asking "how often do we hear of man's scientific wisdom changing?" I
>> sometimes wonder if pastors would understand this better if scientists
>> called new theories "reformations?"
>>
>> __
>> Louise M. Freeman, PhD
>> Psychology Dept
>> Mary Baldwin College
>> Staunton, VA 24401
>> 540-887-7326
>> FAX 540-887-7121
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: "Randy Isaac" <randyisaac@comcast.net>
>> To: <asa@calvin.edu>
>> Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 21:08:46 -0400
>> Subject: Re: [asa] Scientists, Religion, and Politics
>>
>> That's fair enough, Don, as far as it goes, but I think we need a more
>> complete picture to understand what this person was saying about
>> conservatism in scientists. Indeed, breaking new ground and having
>> innovative ideas is the essence of science. That's just the ticket to get in
>> and play. Conservatism is not rejecting new ideas, it is the rigorous and
>> strict adherence to the discipline of scientific methodology. In other
>> words, coming up with new ideas isn't the hardest part, it's figuring out
>> which new idea correctly explains the world around us and convincing the
>> scientific community that this new idea is right. That takes a heap of
>> hard-core conservatism--how you carefully prepared your samples according to
>> time-tested methods, how you meticulously avoided all contamination, how you
>> set up the experiment to differentiate all other possibilities, etc., etc.
>> And until you convince the community that you did it all correctly, and they
>> independently reproduce it all, it's just another firecracker in the air.
>>
>> Unfortunately, too often the innovative spirits who claim to have better
>> knowledge than the broader scientific community--be it the young age of the
>> earth, opposition to global warming, the shortcomings of evolution, or
>> whatever--forget the core conservatism that makes science work. One must do
>> the hard work of sound scientific methodology and convince the scientific
>> community that it was done it correctly. Until then, those ideas are
>> wannabe's. They may be right in the long run and, if so, the scientific
>> community will figure it out sooner or later, but it is highly unlikely. No,
>> claiming that the scientific community is biased and simply refuses to
>> listen to these superior ideas doesn't wash. That's a copout and a refusal
>> to do the really hard and thorough scientific work.
>>
>> Conservatism in science means having clear, core values and rigorous
>> methodology for accepting new ideas into the scientific community.
>>
>> Randy
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> *From:* Don Winterstein <dfwinterstein@msn.com>
>> *To:* asa <asa@calvin.edu>
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 15, 2009 12:26 AM
>> *Subject:* Re: [asa] Scientists, Religion, and Politics
>>
>> My two cents' worth:
>>
>> The very nature of scientists' work is to challenge authority, the
>> received "truth," and replace it with deductions from carefully measured
>> data. One of a scientist's joys is proving an accepted theory incomplete or
>> wrong.
>>
>> The root meaning of conservatism has to do with opposing change and
>> preserving the ways of the past. Religions also impose from on high,
>> declare truth on the basis of "authority."
>>
>> Hence a scientist who's immersed in his work and allows its methods to
>> reach into the rest of his life will tend to challenge and oppose both
>> standard versions of religious truth and conventional ways of living and
>> governing.
>>
>> The fact that scientists as kids often don't fit in probably contributes
>> to the phenomenon.
>>
>> Don
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> *From:* Randy Isaac <randyisaac@comcast.net>
>> *To:* asa@calvin.edu
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 14, 2009 9:01 AM
>> *Subject:* Re: [asa] Scientists, Religion, and Politics
>>
>> I recall that when I was in graduate school, oh so long ago, someone on
>> the
>> faculty made the comment that scientists tended to be more liberal in
>> politics to counter their need to be so conservative in their science. I'm
>>
>> not sure if there's any evidence for a human being to need a balance of
>> liberalism and conservatism in one's life, but it's an observation that
>> stuck with me.
>>
>> Randy
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Ted Davis" < TDavis@messiah.edu>
>> To: "asa" < asa@calvin.edu>; "Merv Bitikofer" < mrb22667@kansas.net>;
>> "Nucacids" <nucacids@wowway.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:17 AM
>> Subject: Re: [asa] Scientists, Religion, and Politics
>>
>>
>> > Polls of this sort are never easy to interpret with much confidence.
>> What
>> > polls have shown consistently for many years is that academics
>> (including
>> > scientists) are far more "liberal" both politically and religiously than
>>
>> > the general American population. That is a generalization, obviously,
>> and
>> > any given academic or scientist can be a right-wing atheist, a left-wing
>>
>> > Christian, or any other combination you can imagine.
>> >
>> > The reasons for this are not really clear to me, but even 60 years ago
>> it
>> > was probably true that a large majority of leading physicists (confining
>>
>> > my comments to physicists, since they are based on what I know
>> anecdotally
>> > about the Manhattan Project) were very liberal politically and mainly
>> > irreligious. Some, like Oppenheimer, had considered Communism very
>> > seriously (his wife was the genuine article), and a few even worked
>> > covertly for the Soviets (American versions of Klaus Fuchs), as
>> documented
>> > extensively by the new book, "Spies: The Rise and Fall of the KGB in
>> > America," based mainly on Soviet archives that became available briefly
>> > several years ago.
>> >
>> > I won't try even to guess at the reasons for this type of demographic,
>> but
>> > I think it would not be too hard to refute a trivial conclusion that
>> > intelligence results in liberal political views and religious
>> scepticism.
>> > Plenty of corporate executives, attorneys, and other folk are also
>> highly
>> > intelligent, and the demographics among them are probably not similar to
>>
>> > those among academics and scientists. People in all walks of life tend
>> to
>> > encourage and empower people who think similarly to themselves, and
>> > similarities of beliefs in these areas are surely part of that. As
>> > someone from a top research university once said to me, "places like
>> [the
>> > university of X] don't hire people from places like Messiah."
>> >
>> > Ted
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
>> > "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>> >
>>
>>
>> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
>> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>>
>>
> ------------------------------
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.375 / Virus Database: 270.13.16/2240 - Release Date: 07/15/09
> 17:58:00
>
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Jul 16 01:21:50 2009