Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
Any thoughts on my musings about thinking like a scientist, R&S?
Being a good scientist requires a mental balancing act that I think doesn't come naturally to a lot of people. Ideally, a scientist never fully accepts any idea until they have all the facts. Since it's impossible to have *all* of the facts, and anyone living in the real world has to make decisions on the information they have available, a good scientist will treat the most likely conclusion (based on the evidence) as provisionally true, while keeping open to the possibility that they're wrong.
Also, when confronted with an idea that seems absurd (such as that light is both a particle and a wave), they should accept it, as long as the evidence supports it. When an idea that seems intuitively obvious (such as that heavier things inherently fall faster) is proven false, they should reject it. In either case, their beliefs should be based on the evidence, not "common sense".
It seems to me like a lot of people--particularly creationists--are deeply uncomfortable with that kind of uncertainty. This is probably at least part of why they reject evolution.
Do you agree or disagree with my musings? Do you think you're capable of that kind of instinctive uncertainty? Can we do anything to explain this issue to the people who fear uncertainty? Any other thoughts?
6 Answers
- Brigalow BlokeLv 77 years agoFavorite Answer
No, you are way above their heads. The kind of uncertainty you mention, wave / particle duality is for those who have reached at least first year university/college level. You are dealing with folks who have next to no idea of optics, as in the fairly well known YouTube video of a woman alarmed by the fact that a lawn sprinkler was producing a rainbow -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_c6HsiixFS8
You are dealing with people who are deeply ignorant of "science" and a lot of other things beside, geography, history etc. There was the New Zealand politician who was fooled by the jokes about dihydrogen monoxide, the man who assured me he was allergic to all "chemicals" and would not believe that everything he could touch was made of chemical compounds or elements, the man who had no idea that England was part of the Roman empire for about 350 years, the people on here who consistently confuse amino acids with nucleic acids, who don't know the obvious difference between an ape and a monkey, the kids who don't understand the difference between the two world wars of the 20th century and on and on it goes.
Educating Hilton
The first genuine creationist I met was Hilton. He'd left school at 14 or 15, or been taken out as soon as it was legal. I was a lab assistant at a coal mine in the Australian Bowen Basin, where coal is Permian - more than 252 million years old. The mine was brand new and the mining lease was large, so some exploration drilling was still happening. Hilton was put on the exploration drilling team taking cores. He had recently been infected with the Assembly of God virus and was driving the geologists and other men nuts with religion and insisting that the Earth was 6,000 years old. Other than that he was a pleasant sort and a good worker.
I had been doing everything, collecting samples, preparing them and doing all of the chemical testing of water and coal and it got too much as the mine swung into production. Management decided to give us Hilton as a lab assistant to collect and prepare samples. He would be working on his own most of the time so he would not be bothering anyone.
So I had to show him how to do this. The stumbling block came when he could not understand that to weigh a small heap of coal, you weighed a bucket, then weighed the bucket and coal and subtracted the bucket weight from the total on paper. I had to demonstrate this with a stray rock in and out of a bucket a few times before he got the idea. We never heard much of the Earth being 6000 years old after that, perhaps he decided that these science people actually knew what they were doing. Later, when it came to float and sink analysis, where coal floats on liquids of different densities while stone sinks, he seemed to have no trouble.
It is my observation in Australia that the sects that promote young Earth creationism are relatively strong in small towns where the smart kids have been leaving for the bigger towns for generations.
- GregLv 77 years ago
Ideally.... a scientist never fully accepts an idea EVER.
The dual nature of the photon wasn't arrived at by conjecture by the way..... it was first proposed because of actual observations. Physicists in the early 20th century all took stances as to why a photon was one or the other (wave being the predominant view because electromagnetism was a known phenomena)..... it did not occur to anyone that it may be both. In other words wave-particle duality and other "quantum weirdness" were never things that were just randomly proposed and then experimented upon..... they were things that were first OBSERVED in experiments and then slowly explained over decades of additional experimentation and complex math.
- Anonymous7 years ago
I'm sure that many young Earth creationists lack the ability to deal with that kind of instinctive uncertainty. The same could be said about 9/11 conspiracy theorists, anti-fluoride activists, anti-nuclear activists, anti-vaccine activists and global warming deniers.
- TeddyLv 67 years ago
I had a long involved answer, but then accidentally closed the page. That said, given your user name, why should I be amused by your musings?
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.