EMBRACE POP SCIENCE

It's cancer.

>average girl
>gets shitty tattoo
>instantly below average

why?

Here is a lesson from Antiquity of what the damage of pop-sci on the development of science.

''Scientific systems were dismantled; parts that were complicated or seemed improbable were excluded and the simple and likely parts were incorporated. Heraclides' planetary theory was partially adopted (i.e. heliocentric motions for Venus and Mercury were accepted, diurnal rotation of the earth on its axis was omitted); but the complete heliocentric theory of Aristarchus of Samos, which included diurnal rotation for the earth, was hardly ever alluded to by handbook writers. This fact helps to explain why the complete theory of Aristarchus expired so quickly, and is one of many examples of the important influence that popular science had upon intellectual developments in Greece."
-Roman Science, William H. Stahl

There's nothing wrong with pop sci. It's better that more people are more interested in science. The only real counter argument is "I want to feel smarter than other people, so we need to force as many people out as possible!" This view is extremely detrimental to society.

>2010

Pop-sci does not get people interested in science. It encourages complacent and lazy learning of basic scientific concept, which allows scientifically illiterates to masquerade as knowledgeable. It promotes an uncritical view of scientific claims while reducing the whole process to a mere set of propositions, ignoring the fact that scientific work is a clash of ideas and models.
Presenting to the public dominant models as 'established science' is no more than disinformation. It's the reason why a few studies about the consumption of salt lead to a widespread belief that eating too much salt is bad for your pressure, despite the issue being contentious. It's why people change their diets and begin consuming too little salt.
Science is hard, and cannot be understood without effort. There is no justification for distilling scientific ideas and serving them ready-cooked to the public. This is not what science is.

Modern society is what encourages complacency and laziness. The overwhelming belief of the western mind is that we only exist to fulfill our lust, greed, and gluttony. Most human progress has been made from people with nothing but free time.

Also, for the lay person, there is no reason not to have surface level knowledge of science. Over time more people will become more interested in harder and harder topics. It's also good to encourage the youth to get more involved in science.

Your statement that "science is hard" is just self congratulatory circlejerking and you just want to discourage others from even trying to make yourself feel like a special snowflake.

Thats just incorrect science becoming popular, Im asking what your problem is with communicating simplified science to your average person

It just seems like you want to be smugly superior because you can do integrals

It's just a pretext for "muh enlightenment" and "muh euphoria" by pretentious cunts/fedoras. It does fuck all to educate laypeople. If you want to see lay education done right, watch old science documentaries from the '60s and earlier.

Unless you stick to physics only, most information in those is probably going to be wrong.

oMG i LOVE science but i HATE math, pyshix and chemistry LOL i Like biology tho cuz GENDER STUDIES XDDD

No one takes gender studies. The real problem is the flood of generic business majors and the rise of "exercise science" and sports related majors as sports slowly destroys our colleges.

>criticizes pop science
>accesses Veeky Forums

Preserved.

this

You are missing the point of this excerpt. It illustrates the fact that scientific theories were lost to history because they were too complicated to present to the public. Because science sought to address the masses, it had to be dumbed down. This is a dangerous truth of pop-sci. The whole book by Stahl is very good, and I recommend it.

Misinformation; I'd be okay with it if they didn't dumb it down for the sake of entertainment

more like poop science

hihi

lul

Tbh, he tries to explain idea that are much deeper into math and science than Niel DeMeme Tyson. He made an almost half hour long video about the banach tarski paradox, and another about zipfs law, topics much more mathematically intimate than the generic pop sci stuff

Though he is still popsci

How 2 like math?

It makes people confident enough to talk about stuff they don't understand.

It's the dunning kruger effect.

FUCK BALDING REDDITORS WITH GLASSES

So what? Talking about it is a good way towards understanding. Not everyone can be an expert on everything.

sounds to me like you guys don't want normies to enter "muh secret club"

>In one layer I could be cock juggling clown having a cock for a penis and you could be straight
kek

This feels like too much effort went into it.
Still very good. Keep the meme practice going.

This, theoretically.
Problem is, with dumb people it does everything that
and
said.

>ITT we act like pretentious fgts who mainly hate pop science because it encroaches on my hobby/passion etc.
>REEE NORMIES STAY AWAY

It doesn't just encroach on them, it quite often shits all over them and treats them like its bitches.
But you do have a point.

What could possibly be wrong with this? youtube.com/watch?v=J65GNFfL94c
Only good things can come from it: more people get interested in mathematics.

>Pop-sci does not get people interested in science.

it does. i was browsing a lot of eli5 biology on reddit and found it fascinating. dropped out of my old school and got into medschool

your entire argument is "you should either fully commit into something or know nothing about it" which is pretty retarded since most people only have deep knowledge over a very specific and small field

Most people who are exposed to pop-sci seem not to share your opinion. I hear things more along the lines of "Why are my tax dollars going towards this when people are starving?" When the public starts deciding where funding goes, which is already beginning, maybe you'll understand why it's preferable that they not be exposed to scientific concepts too hard for them to grasp.

Isn't Veeky Forums also pop sci? There's barely anyone talking about real science here, just one meme science after meme science

Not really pop sci since this is not public outreach.

It's still better when people watch pop sci instead of reality shit like big brother.

i honestly wish pop-science was more connected to the highschool subjects instead of just being more popular. i remember back in high-school, i had no interest in chemistry. its kind of sad but i got interest in it when my grandma was dying. she was on all kind of medications and i found the concept of medicine and drugs truly interesting and eventually it got to a point where i realized this is something i can imagine learning about for years.
when i was just a teenager i couldnt really connect the dots and find the interest in memorizing boring formulas. i can accept that there were people who already find that part interesting, but for me, i needed something more "real". something i can work towards instead of just seeing it as an endless line of formulas and data.

i think finding interest in something naturally is the best thing you can do and can lead to a point where you start to actually study it.

the issue with pop sci is it often leaves people more misinformed than they would otherwise be

the whole premise of it as follows

>published paper with a barely statistically relevant result
>news media latches onto this, fits it into a narrative
>fails to mention that the results are hardly statistically meaningful
>people take the sensationalized news article as absolute truth because there is a link to a study they will never read
>muh 1 in 4 women are raped, muh women make 70cents at the same job as a man, muh global ice will all be melted by 2013, muh C02 tax will fix pollution, muh vaccines are bad, muh vaccines are good, muh prison experiment

at least people knew they were dumb before, now their belief systems are just at the whim of pop sci pushers, and they actually think they are educated

What you're describing is the problems with media sensationalisation and is not a problem for science alone

Pop sci is the simplification of science so the average layman can understand it. Sensationlisation is deliberate misinterpretation of data to present a narrative. One is dumbing down a subject, the other is straight up wrong

The two converge very frequently.

sounds to me like you're a fucking faggot

Science is VIP. No normies allowed.

But they're not mutually inclusive.

No, but I would dare advance that [math] \vert \{x:x \text{ is pop-sci} \} \cap \{x: x\text{ is misinformation} \} \vert > \vert \{x:x \text{ is pop-sci} \} - \{x: x\text{ is misinformation} \} \vert [/math].

Clearly false, all one needs to do is look at politics to conclude [math]\vert \{x:x \text{ is misinformation} \} \cap ~ \{x: x\text{ is pop-sci} \} \vert > \vert \{x:x \text{ is pop-sci} \} \cap \{x: x\text{ is misinformation} \} \vert[/math]

Wait, I think you made an error since you are saying the set of 'misinformation and pop-sci' is greater than itself. What were you trying to say? Or is there something I'm not getting?

yeah was supposed to be {x is misinformation}^~{x is pop sci} but idk how math tags work

kek

Pop science is a good way to find interesting topics to look up.

Very true. If only people would actually look things up instead of assuming they can discuss with MIT professors as peers just because they read a column on scientific american.

why are you so butthurt man? where do you see all these people? especially considering there are so many areas we know very little about. even when it comes the most frequently used things, like exact mechanism of certain medications

Where do you NOT see them? I'm pretty sure everyone here has had several conversations with people of the kind that I'm referring to.
Also your other point has nothing to do with pop-sci