“Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world.” – Albert Einstein
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.” – Albert Einstein
“Once you stop learning, you start dying.” – Albert Einstein
“Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen.” – Albert Einstein
“I would rather have questions that can’t be answered than answers that can’t be questioned.” – Richard Feynman
Indeed, what is in a name? Richard Feynman once said, “You can know the name of a bird in all the languages of the world, but when you’re finished, you’ll know absolutely nothing whatever about the bird… So, let’s look at the bird and see what it’s doing — that’s what counts.” Armed with this bit of knowledge, we can now look at our fledgling Scientisms medium. We can deconstruct the name, and figure out its etymology, but that gets us no closer to what it truly is. (Oh, and by the way, I will actually break the word down in this blog post, I’m contrary like that.) And what Scientisms is is a way for a small group of people who love science and learning and the natural world to help share their understanding of what science truly. And to everyone they come across. Like being vegan but less annoying. (Sorry vegans, I just had to.)
In the course of these blog posts, and ensuing podcasts, hopefully, we will be able to share knowledge and, perhaps, some insight on the truth behind the headlines. What do these difficult to read scientific studies actually mean? Should I drink a glass of red wine in the evening? What about that coffee in the morning, is it killing me or strengthening my constitution? This is the problem with our current click-bait and headline-oriented culture. The focus is on the thumbnail, and not the thumb. Why is this? Well, I believe there are two main reasons: The first reason is that each click counts. To sell ads, and to show content views, most online organizations have to have something which will compel the readers, particularly the casual readers, to click through to the ad infused main story; Secondly, in this online culture of micro soundbites, and minimal character messages, it seems that everything is viewed under the “tl;dr” spotlight. “Hit them with the sensational, and then sum it up into tiny morsels of information (I truly wanted to type “pseudo-information”, but somehow restrained myself. Or did I?) A recent headline implying, “Eat more pasta if you want to live longer” is one of the most misleading headlines in the game of click me. Not at all what the study suggested, but it sure does grab people’s attention. “Awesome! Honey, make that pizza order TWO larges!”
So what’s in a name? Scientisms grew out of the idea of the two root words: Science, and “-isms”, or belief systems. I do honestly love one of Neil deGrasse Tyson’s quotes. “The good thing about science is that it’s true whether or not you believe in it.” But yet anytime we talk about scientific things, the words coming out tend to lean towards belief. Do you “believe” in human caused climate change? Do you believe that humans and chimpanzees (and any other two plants or animals you’d like to compare) came from a single common ancestor? Honestly, belief does not play in. Science is evidence-based. Bottom line. Studies don’t typically “prove” this or that. Rather studies culminate in a conclusion of “the data suggest…”. A good scientist leaves herself open to any possibility which could exist. This is the hallmark of that great scientist. It’s also the door where pseudo-science advocates can wedge a foot in. So you’re saying that bigfoot could exist then? A true scientist would have to say it’s a possibility, but then would counter with things pseudo-scentists don’t want to hear; but for a population large enough for a continued existence, the food supply necessary, and the… and so on. And thus the scientist would probably say, possible, but not probable. Probability plays a big part in science, and that’s just the way I like it. Science takes it all into account, and then says things like we may not know everything, but this we are certain of. All evidence points to the consistency of the theory of gravity. Detection of gravitons lends credence to gravitational theory, and Einstein’s general theory. And yet probability, the linchpin of quantum mechanics shows us things that seem to run counter to what we… believe. Yes. Believe. What we believe to be true, shored up by evidence. Mountains of evidence, yet still belief creeps in. I believe (see what I did there) that our homo sapiens brains have evolved with this structure of a belief system as a way to model the world we live in. Ages ago it protected us on the savannah. The tall grass held mysterious dangers our belief system told us, as the model had proven itself over and over again. So now when we take this pragmatic stance of science, we fit this into this old belief structure in our brains as a way to build, and scale, this model of the universe and nature. Yet we have to strive to keep this corralled in and not let ourselves be distracted by the pseudo nature of our common sense telling us “that just can’t be right.” Well, the data suggests…
Science!
Marvin L. C. Hoffman
Scientisms 