首页> 外文期刊>Journal and Proceedings of the Royal Society of New South Wales >Evidence, Opinion and Interest – the attack on scientific method
【24h】

Evidence, Opinion and Interest – the attack on scientific method

机译:证据,意见和利益 - 对科学方法的攻击

获取原文
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Science and research generally are given disturbingly low priority in contemporary public life in Australia, although medical research and astronomy may be exceptions. Scientists, especially those involved with climate change, or the environment, have come under unprecedented attack, especially in the media, and the whole concept of scientific method is discounted, even ridiculed. In a complex world, people seem to be looking for simple solutions that can be expressed as slogans, and the quality of public debate on scientific issues has been trivialised, even infantilised. The controversy on anthropogenic global warming (AGW) has been conducted at an appalling level on both sides of politics. (Debates on refugees and taxation have been conducted at a similar level.) Vaccination, fluoridation and even evolution are hotly, but crudely, disputed in some areas. Despite Australia’s large number of graduates (more than 4,000,000), our 38 universities and intellectual class generally have very limited political leverage and appear reluctant to offend government or business by telling them what they do not want to hear. Universities have become trading corporations, not just communities of scholars. Their collective lobbying power seems to be weak, well behind the gambling, coal or junk food lobbies and they become easy targets in times of exaggerated Budget stringency. Paradoxically, the Knowledge Revolution has been accompanied by a persistent ‘dumbing down’, with ICT reinforcing the personal and immediate, rather than the complex, long-term and remote. In a democratic society such as Australia, evidence is challenged by opinion and by vested- or selfinterest. Australia has no dedicated Minister for Science with direct ownership/ involvement in promoting scientific disciplines. If every vote in Australian elections is of equal value, does this mean that every opinion is entitled to equal respect? It is easy to categorise experts as elitists, and out of touch. There are serious problems in recruiting science teachers, and numbers of undergraduates in the enabling sciences and mathematics are falling relative to our neighbours. In an era of super-specialisation, many scientists are reluctant to engage in debate, even where their discipline has significant intersectoral connections. Science has some outstanding Australian advocates, Gus Nossal, Peter Doherty, Ian Chubb, Fiona Stanley, Robert May, Brian Schmidt, Ian Frazer, Mike Archer among them, but they lack the coverage that is needed and that they deserve. There is a disturbing lack of community curiosity about our long term future, with an apparent assumption that consumption patterns will never change.
机译:虽然医学研究和天文学可能是例外,但科学和研究通常在当代公共生活中受到令人满意的公共生活优先级。科学家们,尤其是涉及气候变化的科学家,或环境,都受到前所未有的攻击,特别是在媒体中,科学方法的整个概念折扣,甚至嘲笑。在一个复杂的世界中,人们似乎正在寻找可以表达为口号的简单解决方案,以及对科学问题的公众辩论的质量已经差异化,甚至是租借。人为全球变暖(AGW)的争议已经在政治两侧的令人震惊的水平下进行。 (关于难民和税收的辩论已经在类似的水平上进行。)疫苗接种,氟化甚至进化是热的,而是在某些地区的争论。尽管澳大利亚的大量毕业生(超过4,000,000),我们的38所大学和智力级别一般都有非常有限的政治杠杆,并且通过告诉他们他们不想听到的是冒犯政府或业务的绩效。大学已成为交易公司,而不仅仅是学者的社区。他们的集体游说权力似乎很虚弱,赌博后面,煤炭或垃圾食品大厅,他们在夸张的预算严格时变得简单的目标。矛盾的是,知识革命一直伴随着持续的“Dumbing”,ICT加强了个人和立即,而不是复杂,长期和遥控器。在澳大利亚等民主社会中,证据受到意见和既得或自信的挑战。澳大利亚没有专门的科学部长,直接拥有/参与促进科学学科。如果澳大利亚选举中的每次投票都是相同的价值,这是否意味着每个意见都有权获得平等尊重?很容易将专家作为精英主义者分类,并脱离触摸。招聘科学教师有严重的问题,有利科学和数学中的本科生数量相对于我们的邻国越来越突破。在超级专业化的时代,即使在他们的纪律方面具有重要跨域联系的情况下,许多科学家也不愿意参与辩论。科学有一些优秀的澳大利亚倡导者,GUS NOSSAL,Peter Doherty,Ian Chubb,Fiona Stanley,Robert May,Brian Schmidt,Ian Frazer,迈克·阿雷泽,他们缺乏所需的覆盖范围,他们应得的覆盖范围。关于我们长期未来的社区好奇心缺乏令人不安的缺乏社区好奇心,这是一种明显的假设,即消费模式永远不会改变。

著录项

获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号