Archived
E-mail Discussion List
|
|
Return to E-mail Discussion page Next in threadHi everyone, I'm forwarding part of a recent conversation with Jack, because I think it raises an important question: Is "taking away some of the fun of life" a necessary consequence of thinking scientifically? If not, then what is it about the way science is often presented that makes people view it this way? I sometimes feel this way about science myself, but I'm not quite sure I can pinpoint why. Is it that science brings us face to face with the limitations that the "external world" imposes upon us, and we rebel against that? Or is it something else? - Todd ---------- Todd, I was thinking about part our conversation about athletic performance earlier today. It's the part of the conversation when we were talking about using science to optimize athletic training and race performance. We both agreed that we should be able to monitor an athlete and work out ways to optimize performance. What later really struck me was our conversation where you said something like, "It seems doing that might take some of the fun out of it." I replied, "Do you want fun, or do you want to win?" Partly we were just kidding around, but what really struck me later about what we said is that I've heard this conversation before. In SLA classes, I've heard humanities majors saying this about science. What I've heard them saying is that they feel that doing things "scientifically" might "take some of the fun out of it." When we were talking, I shared in knowing exactly what you meant, because I've often found myself in other situations saying exactly what you said. I think that this is an important issue about attitudes toward science. People somehow feel deep down that science will take away freedom, choices, and fun. For example, a lot of research comes out about what we should eat or not eat to optimize health. But people still want to eat what they want to eat (myself included). Science is perceived almost like going on a diet. And most diets are no fun. In a similar way, being taught science is almost like being told how to think, what to think, what's right and wrong. Science is perceived almost like going on a mental diet. People want to think what they want to think. They don't want "science" to take away their freedom, choices, and fun. For me, our conversation helped crystallize this issue in my mind. Let me crystallize the issue with some questions: How does following a scientific program (e.g., for athletic performance, diet, thinking) take away the fun? Why do most of us (myself included) want the freedom to do what we want despite what "scientific research" says? And if we separate our personal choices (diet, excercise, etc.) from what scientific research indicates we should do, then is science really integrated into our lives? If we do want to integrate science in our lives, does this mean that our food choices should be governed by scientific research? Most of us adopt compromises. But where do we draw the line of compromise? What roledoes "nutritional information fatigue" play in us giving up in despair and deciding to just eat anything because it's more fun? Is there an analogous "science information fatigue?" It comes down to the general questions: Do people have to protect themselves against a science that takes away their freedom, choices, and fun? Is science incompatible with fun? -Jack |
