Is it worth teaching the common folk science or is it not worthwhile? If so...

Is it worth teaching the common folk science or is it not worthwhile? If so, what should we teach them and what would they better not know?

Discuss.

I guess I have my answer. H-ha ha.

if we don't they might start thinking climate change is a hoax by the chinese, or that vaccines cause autism. Then they might vote for a presidential candidate that says these things.

Thankfully that will never happen...

But they do. So what's the solution buddy?

Maybe we need to learn from the esoteric and exoteric theology. We tell the common folk:

"Vaccines are God's gift and he demands ye to use them."

"Climate change is God's wrath for using the forbidden fruit of fossil fuels."

Know what I'm saying?

It is but only at the most elementary level. You might think that schools already do that but they actually do not. At least, not in public schools. Public school teachers know absolutely nothing about their own subjects and are quite unfit to teach even foundational knowledge which, I'd argue, is the most critical area in a person's understanding of any subject. If the teacher actually thoroughly understands the subject and is enthusiastic about elucidating the intracacies to beginners in terms that they can understand, I say only good can come of it. The reason people are so illiterate in math and science is because the "education" they receive is woefully ineffective and I put that on the idiotic school curriculum which values tedious written assignments and group projects over conceptual understanding. They truly seem to believe that a lack of in depth knowledge can be remedied by the sheer volume of homework they assign, stressing students out while teaching them nothing. It's criminal. Who wouldn't come to believe that they "aren't good at academic subjects" if that was how they were exposed to those subjects.

Only to the extent that they need to be sufficiently disinterested or okay with what we're doing that they don't make any significant effort to interfere with it.

If they're completely clueless about something, they tend to oppose it (e.g. genetic engineering) ; if they know a little bit about it (but obviously not in any particular detail) they tend to either not care or think it's alright.

There are always going to be a handful of loons who will oppose any given activity; the important thing is to make sure that these people are seen as gaggles of eccentric hippies and lunatics. So long as that group stays sufficiently small, we can carry on working.

There's no real benefit in going beyond that level and trying to seriously educate the public on scientific issues. Very few of them are even interested, let alone willing to devote the time necessary to really understand anything - and most of them wouldn't understand even if they tried.

Over education is fucking it all - everyone can operate a computer to order a broom
But no one can sweep the floors

Universities should be a premium not something everyone goes too

We've already have popular science books, tv shows and other things, I think education systems need critical thinking and logic lessons in grade schools. It's better to think for yourself than being shoved down your throat.

People should be taught critical thinking, math up to algebra and basic statistics, and the basics of biology, physics and chemistry.

By critical thinking I mean a course in logic, where the basic premise is to get the idea that all theories of anything can be analyzed in similar ways. What is the evidence, what to they predict, and do the predictions match the real world. Also the seive of explanations, the more ad hoc things you need to explain your theory, the worse it is. I'm looking at you flat Earth model. Basically teaching the ability to weigh good and bad ideas and world views.

Basic algebra and statistics (and probability theory, and a little set theory thrown in) are just useful for keeping yourself from being foolled by bad science.

basic biology should cover the theory of cells, genetics and evolution. Basic chemistry and physics are just that, non-quantum theory of atoms, and Newtonian physics. Maybe enough QM to explain why windows are transparent and maybe a little special relativity, but doesn't have to be to much.

Would we, if we could, educate and sophisticate pigs, geese, cattle?

Sounds good user. But from my personal experience alone I know that I forget about a lot of stuff taught in school. I would say ways of doing things stick more as knowledge, so learning logic sounds good to me.

I personally think system thinking and cognitive biases should be learned in high school.

I would also like to see, except for a few essentials, more difference in education on school. Different thinking schools if you will.

pipe dream, user pipe dream. although i also have this dream, so don't take that offensively.

i really wish more schools really pressed on critical thinking and logic. one of the core issues of primary school is that it is trying to balance the education of traditional academic fields whilst at the same time combating the sometimes very complex nature of pubescent humans when all forced into the same building for hours on end, you know? education in today's society is just as much a social issue as it is an academic one.

>is just as much a social issue
It absolutely is.

Good post.

I could get pretty deep into this, but I'll keep it brief.

The thing is, society isn't in a place right now where scientific pursuits are at the forefront.

Let's be real ... school is really just grooming people to fit into society and prepare them for a desk job. So, since the focus of society is economic growth, job creation and raising up the lower and middle class, most of these jobs are fairly monotonous. Thus, the skills you really need to work are writing reports and team communication skills, hence the assignments and group projects.

Facts of science should be learned of course.

Free speech, open inquiry, rational debate, accumulation of evidence is also what we should teach them.

But you are common folk. You have a false sense of superiority.

Ok, so should you teach people like me?

That's right, folks. Let's instead indoctrinate our population that our culture and land deserves an unsubstantial immigration policy.

While we're at it, why not continue to ruin race-relations with another four years of Obama.

>unsubstantial
terrible word choice m8

>common folk
Are STEM students really this far up their own ass?

Gotta put it in the bible first.

YES.

you could teach them the value in folding clothes or flipping a burger patty for the greater good of capitalism

>Is it worth teaching the common folk science

Yes. People should have some sense of how the world around them works.

>what should we teach them

Freshman-sophomore year material.

I have to say I do not approve of sci's education plan. It is way to ambitious.

>rational debate

tip fedora

Can't stand the idea of children knowing more than you do?

Oh you have no idea.

And the worst part is that they're still right.

>having a black president ruins race-relations
Out of all things you could've criticized Obama for, your complaint is that he's black?

Pigs, geese and cattle don't vote.

Where did it say black in that post?

Ok nigger

Science is something people should have at least a good idea about, because then they can understand things themselves and not have "scientists" tell them what to think.