An interesting Pew report has it that only 6% of scientists consider themselves Republicans. Given that scientists, though not always as emotionally neutral as they think, tend to be critical thinkers, and as the report points out, identify less with faith in God than the general public, what do you think this says, in general, about the direction the party needs to pursue regard policy, platform and image, if any? Oh, and for those who see everyone as being leftist or rightist, the report mentions that dirty little word, Independents, which were greater in number than Republicans.
P.S. I tried to link the Pew report directly, to bypass the Huffington Post article, but was not able too. However, the link to it is in the article, and I'd recommend that you read it from the source.
-- Modified on 7/10/2009 12:37:23 PM
Scientists are critical thinkers in science. However, they are not necessarily trained in other areas that are equally critical in reasoning. Why does a math expert have a greater insight into God?
For example, legal scholars are trained in critical thinking and reasoning, but they may be idiots in science, like me.
Literature majors are experts in comprehension and reasoning in different ways. Was Lady McBeth fainting or feigning? What parts of the play indicate that the idea arose with Lady M. What lines of the play indicate that The Thane was predisposed. Did the idea originate with him?
With all due respect, a dentist or eye surgeon is not necessarily an intellectual genius, as much as a mechanic how can manipulate little items. They had the will power to go through school and study enough to get into med school, but that shows perseverance as much as intelligence.
A chemist knows that X mixes with Y to make Z (Boy, am I dumb in that area?) But that can be accomplished as much by memory as intellect.
In fact, I would guess that the best educated group of women in the world are nuns. And their education is not in theology alone. I have had experience in Catholic schools. The nuns had Ph.D.s in education, literature, art history, science, and a dozen other areas. And that does not count Master's degrees in more areas. The number that have multiple advanced degrees is astounding. (On the male side, the priest I knew from that school now teaches computer sciences, although his second degree is psychology.)
Read the book Seminary about the training of priests. Theology is a small portion of their education. Latin, Greek, Hebrew are common, and often other languages. (Probably every priest in Italy or France is fluent in English. Probably 90% of the priests in L.A. also speak Spanish.)
In fact, if you look at the classes at a seminary today, it is more like Harvard and Yale in 1920, before they "dumbed down" class requirements. (The military academies are the same. You can't say, "I don't like Shakespeare. I want to take a course on Elvis and Images.)
Finally, science may have a vested interest. People connected with universities have a vested interest in the party that is most likely to be most generous to their business. Also, many grants are phrased politially. (One quick example: The stimulus package contains money for studying the effect of global warming. Right there it is tipped in one direction.)
Science is a field like any other. They are good in their specialty. But when people step outside their expertise they are as good or as bad as the next guy.
but the GOP has been for lack of a better word hostile against science. Perhaps not as much on the national level than local. For an example, intelligent design should be taught along side evolution. Its one thing to oppose global warming but its another thing to say the earth is 6,000 years old, as one state GOP Rep stated last week. Also most scientist study things that are useful but not profitable. As one of my rsearcher friends lament....I work in a lab for cancer research we get little funding from the government but if I worked for a defense contractor , I would get make much more - all government resources
-- Modified on 7/10/2009 11:33:17 AM
First, I agree that intelligent design should not be taught, but I believe a lot of that type of thinking is a reaction to all the limiting of things that used to be okay and even part of America. Pre-Bush, presidents galore cited religion and invocations were allowed at all public events. (FDR's D-Day "speech" was more of a prayer or sermon than political address.)
All this intelligent design stuff, which, again, I disgaree with, I think is a reaction to the hostility to religion. (One funny example: I live near the Thai area. There is big statute on the street of a gold-plated religious figure. The ACLU goes ape-shit over a cross on a hill, but a Golden God on the sidewalk is under the radar. Maybe Christians should sue to get it removed. They won't. They are more tolerant of the Thai than the ACLU is of Christians.)
Also, the numbers that believe in the earth being 6,000 years old is miniscule. I have known thousands of religious people, and never met one with that view. I am not denying it exists. It is just rare.
In any event, I don't care what people believe, as long as they don't bother me. Does it upset anyone here that the Moslem Congressman believes religious things that are inherent in Islam? Nope. People can believe anythig they want.
ALso, you say scientists study things that may be useful, but not profitable. That doesn't matter. Money for academia is money. They have a financial interest in the group that is most likely to keep money flowing. Proving a math problem may not make a lot of royalties, but it pays the professor's salary, trip to Europe, television, rent, etc.
The fact that a scientist can analyze the physics involved in some scientific problem does not mean that he can parse the economics of health care reform, although he may have an academic interest in the party that pays more to teachers.
Finally, the government has always given a lot to medical research. Should they give more? I really don't know. There are many, many private sources that fund medical research. Charities (think Jerry Lewis - billions), institutions, and businessess pay for tons of scientific research. True, they are looking for a "cure" they can patent, but they are still spending billions.
Defense is necessary, and there is only one source for defense. Only the feds will pay for it, so they have to give that priority above some things that other sources will provide billions for.
Funny thing: Obama is very concerned about N. Korea and missiles. He just sent a slew of anti-missile defenses to Hawai'i. Thank God that we had invested in anti-missile technology or the option would be to nuke N. Korea before it can do anything. Fortunately, having anti-missile abilities, we can afford to take a more rational approach. (Of course, he is cutting anti-missile research and programs now, which may not be good if the next pres needs them.)
Physics is not the only science?
Scientists can understand any subject if they want understand better than laymen because of their ability think but may not want to.
Some of your premises true at the fringe and some are flawed because you are generalizing.
I know many scientists that are not connected to Universities or businesses but toils daily in other research facilities. Top notch well respected ones.
Yes, this culture that measures success by the amount of money but still there few that doesn't.
You wrote, "Scientists can understand any subject if they want understand better than laymen because of their ability think but may not want to."
First, they can understand other subjects "IF THEY WANT TO." However, they may not be versed in other subjects. Therefore, the fact that they have certain views - the original topic of this thread - is meaningless. Yes, they have views outside their expertise. But those views may not be any more educated than someone else.
Second, it isn't true they can understand subjects better than others, if they want to. They would not necessarily understand politics any better any any other educated person who also wants to read up on that field.
As a result, an attorney, a teacher, an accountant, a business person with a Master's degree, or any other educated person can understand politics as well as a scientist.
Scientists are no smarter OUTSIDE their field than many other people.
Your definition of scientists seems to be very narrow.
a sneaky way to say there is a god. Why do you want the taxpayers to support it being taught in public schools? There is no god.
Yep! I agree with you on your points, particularly about seminary's. Critical thinking is not restricted to scientists, and scientist do not necessarily exercise their critical thinking skills in all areas of their lives. However, I think there is a difference between the "way" one thinks, versus their area of expertise, which I consider being more about "what someone knows about." And, regarding scientists having vested interests due to being more closely aligned with academia, the Pew report, which you didn't have due to my failing to link the article which had it embedded, points out that the tendency proved out no matter whether the scientist was employed by the government, academia, industry or Non-profit. There was the greatest number, who identified as being Republican, in the industry category. So there can be some truth in what you're saying.
HP jams all the fucking time and I have high speed acess . Damn I have no patience with that site 
-- Modified on 7/10/2009 12:39:05 PM
Well I have a college degree. It is from Appalachian State not HAAAVAAAHD.
My opinion is the most intelligent thing I can say is I don't know.
It really is not all that bad and some of the most assured reading this might want to try it.
In my opnion it is about the smartest thing any human being can mutter.
We have all kinds of symbols that people memorize and can recite.
Do they really mean anything? What I mean is we set our time here in the US by EST CST and whatever they use in Kalifornia.
Ok so does mean anything in reality but to us? Does God go by EST?
All our mathematical symbols again means something to us. For simplicity just use the numbers from 1 to 100. They mean something to us but in reality they do not mean squat.
Religions are the same. Jesus means something to Christians but nothing to Atheist. So knowing Christian Theology means what? Nothing.
Ok these things do mean something to the people who have taken the time to memorize them.
The thing is to not take them too close to the vest and always remember we do not know shit.
Anyone who wants to take the time to study or find out about the capacity of the brain knows we are only using a very small amount of what is there.
It is like sitting in a VERY dark very detailed room. Make a guess what is in the room when it is almost pitch black dark and then amaze yourself as you turn the light on stronger and stronger.
Then you realize you did not know shit.
As we progress as humans we discover what we thought at one time early on is not the same thing we believe as we get older and some of us wiser.
That is the HUGE problem I have with religions and its followers. Any religion not just the mouth breathing Christians. At least the scientists are open to being humble over time as they discover the continuous folly of their conclusions.
The religious want their truth to be absolute.
They only end up being absolutely ridiculous.
The only constant in this experience that I am aware of is change. The only absolutes are we were born and we are going to die.
Everything else is opinion subject to change.
I am therefore I hobby!
Carry On!
Shifterp
-- Modified on 7/10/2009 2:21:59 PM
what does that have to do with my questions. If you want to express your opinions on something of your own interest, then start you own tread.
In the Immortal words of Blutarski
"It just doesn't matter, it just doesn't matter"!
And Yo matt, those are my opinions of the questions you proposed.
You asked what people thought about whatever and I answered.
So in the future if you care not to read what my opinions are I recommend writing your questions something like, These questions are for anyone EXCEPT Shifterp cause we all know his opinion is no one knows shit"!
Yeah that would work.
Anyone Anyone Beuller!
Shifterp OUT!
I would add the more we think you know, the less you actually know.
I read this when I read a paper on "Theory Behind Mathematics" called titled "Three Pillars of Civilization of the World" and here it is:
Philosophy is thinking about the world we live in
Religion is living with thins in the world we live in
Science is working with things in the world we live in
Do not know if that is scary or what?
What did I mean???? LOL
I was getting at that all these core ideas all these belief systems, religions, philosophy, science are all just our attempts to understand our surroundings.
They could all be based on whooey!
I mean way back in the day religious leaders killed folks for saying the earth was round and the earth revolved around the sun.
Those people who killed people overe that stuff believed with everthing they had just like people believe in their science, religion and philosophy today.
So what I am saying is none of those theories matter!!!!!!!!!!!
And apparently Matt one guy gets me!!!!!
Ok the only thing that really matters is none of us knows shit! Using that as a starting point then lets see how we decide to treat each other.
There is no religious authority, just some people with potential theories. They might be right but they have no authority to rule over other people caus their theory is right! Right, who knows?
I am telling you back in the day people would DIE for the theory that the earth was flat! Ok now we know it isn't so it seems silly to say it now! It was not funny way back to be charges with heresy for saying that. You feeling me?
If we all do not know shit, do not know where we are, where we are going then lets treat one another like we are all in this together.
See Matt, that is an attitude to take with you as you venture into religion, philosophy and science.
Making any sense? none of us has any answers to anything, just OUR own personal answers. What we have thought about and make us feel as secure as we can in this shit whoever put us here with such a fricking lack of info!!!!! But just cause an answer makes us feel good for a little while does not make it absolute truth.
So we are all just bozoes on the bus and just need to treat each other as best we can till we croak and find out if there is anything after this Magical Mystery Tour!!!!
Now drop and give me twenty!!!!!!!!!
Shifterp OUT!!!!!!!
Sit back, smoke something and think about it.
Critical thinking does not suit many unscientific stand of Republicans:
1) Global warming is hoax
2) God created man in seven days ( I really don't know the exact days it took god)
2) People should live their lives according whatever values they think because most people can't think (may be some truth there)
3) We should go kill everyone that doesn't agree with us
I am sure there are plenty more.
Speaking only for myself here, but it was my nursing classes, particularly anatomy and physiology that deepened my conviction in the existence of God. The mind blowing complexities of the human body are what convince me beyond all doubt that such a perfectly designed being could only have been created by an intelligent hand. There is absolutely no way, no matter how many trillions of years go by, that the human body could have developed by mere accident and coincidence. That is my belief anyways. Faith if you will
Of course, I still reject all forms of organized religions. I think they ALL got it wrong LOL.
I'm just making the point that for some, science can deepen and affirm faith just as easily as it can create a crisis of faith. When one contemplates the awesome pool of knowledge we humans possess, while contemplating the vast amounts of things we still do not understand, it is hard to imagine how one could not look to the heavens and think "wow, He really is GOOD"
I think we're in much the same place. Science has strengthen my faith in the existence of God, though I struggle to really find a place in any organized religion. Science has not made my faith journey any easier, but has caused many, many crisis's of faith, and each time I make it through, my faith becomes stronger.
Well not the direction I am going in Matt but good luck finding what has meaning for you in your life.
Personally, I have found that admitting I do not know anything frees me up to not have to have like a scorecard where my faith in concerned.
Kind of like a ignorance is bliss kind of a thingy. But not in a bad way but a happy way.
I think when I figured out time and space are an illusion that it really helped. What I mean by that is consciousness knows no time and space. So like the dudes back 2000 years ago were just as confused as we are. And if we were able to travel in time back there it would SEEM like right now.
We never and no one else either, ever gets out of right now. So thinking just because there were folks who wrote down what they thought was going on 2000 years ago doesn't really give it any credibility. Just cause it is old does not mean there is any truth in it. People just want to give old stuff credibility so they do not have to admit everyone then and now is just as clueless as they are, so to speak.
I am just winging it with a smile on my face and if there is anything after I expire I will ask whatever WTF they were thinking sticking us down here with such a huge lack of information to make a quality decision.
SP
To a very high degree of probability, there is no god. You can't prove a negative except in mathematics.
However, you can rule out many of the accepted aspects of god.
That's a novel approach to the question. Cheers to you.
That was fascinating,
I didn’t see how the polling defined a “scientist”. Most likely someone with a PhD. There is a lifestyle factor that helps to explain some of this poll. Scientists are a product of many years of indoctrination by the irrefutably liberal academic community. It’s difficult to spend so many years immersed in that community without ones viewpoint changing.
My 30+ years of experience has told me that engineers are far more pragmatic than scientists and also tend to be more conservative. 'Us engineers' got out before it was too late, LOL.