And Thomas Moore responded:
>Most scientists that I know are always nervous about the press, such as
>_Time_. Very few of their writers really know that much about what
>they're writing about in the first place, let alone translated from
>science to public consuption without changing what was claimed. Frankly,
>I'm glad I'll never publish in JAMA because have the news media lay in
>wait for the next journal to plaster all sorts of results all over the place!
I agree that a central problem to the E/C debate is the way that the popular
press simplifies and paints complex issues in black and white. By this the
lay public receives a caricature of what science and scientists are about.
On the other hand, we (scientists) have, by and large, done a dismal job in
communicating to the public what it is that we do. This, I believe, is
because most scientists cannot easily articulate what it is that they do.
In other words, I believe that scientists are poorly trained in the
philosophy and history (i.e., the context of their profession), while being
highly trained in the methods and technology (i.e., the content) of their
profession. Donald Kennedy, in a book review, wrote that "If we (academics)
are seen to tolerate or excuse muddleheadedness, we surely cannot complain
if the world stops taking us seriously."
So, here's to those on both sides of the evolution/creation debate who are
truly interested in reducing the muddleheadedness quotient in favor of well
reasoned dialog. Let's promote honesty and truth over dogma and conformity.
Cheers!
Steve
__________________________________________________________________________
Steven S. Clark, Ph.D. Phone: (608) 263-9137
Associate Professor FAX: (608) 263-4226
Dept. of Human Oncology and email: ssclark@facstaff.wisc.edu
UW Comprehensive Cancer Ctr
University of Wisconsin
Madison, WI 53792
"It is the glory of God to conceal a matter, but the glory of kings
to search out a matter." Proverbs
__________________________________________________________________________