In class this week the topic ofthe scientist came up and we as a class debated on whether or not it was important forthe said scientist to "dumb-down" their research so that "normal" people could understand what the research was actually about. Here I am going tobe elaborate on my point that it is not necessary for scientist to stupefy their research fore us "regular" folk don't need to know what's going on . Let me explain, when it comes to scientific research the people who "need" to be impressed is not the everyday person, but people in the scientific community. Let's think for a minute, in high school when you wanted to be seen as cool you wanted to impress the people that "being cool" meant something. You weren't trying to impress the Emo kids or the geeks you wanted to impress the "cool-kids." That same idealology holds true for the scientific community. If you are not apart of that community then these scientist are not going to go out of their way to enlighten you on their research.
I also believe there is a sense of elite-ness that comes with being only one of the few that understands what's going on. When everyone knows something it loses its exclusivity. With having a community in which u can share ur findings vs. Having the entire world know your new found information. These scientist take pride in their research and they want clout for their discoveries. This is not out of the norm but a natural human want.
Lupe Fiasco - Dumb It Down (Speaks on how the music industry wants him to dumb down his lyrics to appeal to a larger audience...but he refuses and explains why!)
So to sum up this post I just want you all to take away that no it is not necessary for scientist to dumb down their work to appeal to the common person. It is however important for them to appease those in their community.
I agree with your point that it's most important for scientists to be understood by others in the scientific community, because those are the people that can give them the most legitimate criticisms and they are also the sources from which they receive funding for research. However, science isn't a field that's restricted to the scientific community; it affects all Americans. Therefore, those Americans who are affected by science in terms of the economy or health, for example, should be informed of what's going on. Undeniably the work of scientists will have to be simplified or explained concisely when published in newspapers, but I don't think that means that people don't have the right to learn about it at all.
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree with your assertion that it is not necessary for scientists to 'dumb down' the research they have done and the findings that they have made so that the can be easily to understood by everyone. With that said, I think that certain conditions and situations make it desirable for a scientist to develop communication skills sufficient to relay their ideas to the public. It is often easier to receive research grants, and other forms of funding when one's idea is popular, and public opinion supports it, or has interest in learning more about it. This would require the scientist, or an intermediary at least though to make efforts to communicate how he conducts his research, or his findings in a less 'scientific' less ambiguous way. In a way, I think there can be a sort of domino effect in the scientific, where public support and recognition creates more funding which creates more developed research and finally more prestige for the scientist.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your blog post--for the most part. However, I believe there are several different types of scientists. When we had this discussion as a group, we did not differentiate between them. For instance, if you have ever watched the show, The Big Bang Theory, the main characters of the show are two physicists. The type of experiments they are performing, quite frankly, are going to have little to no interest in the general public’s views, as this work is more than likely more complicated than what 99.999% of the American population can understand. However, there are scientists out there who work on things people can understand and are interesting in. It is these scientists that should “dumb-down” their work for the education of the public.
ReplyDeleteI think you are right that scientists do not like to dumb down their research and only attempt to impress their colleagues, but is this good for the rest of the public? Why can’t a scientist share his or her finding with the rest of the scientific community, get the recognition, and then attempt to dumb it down somewhat so ordinary people at least have a chance at understanding it? I believe scientists have a duty to explain their work to the general public, because things they are working on can have serious benefits or ramifications for everyone, not just other scientists. It is true that people have no done enough to educate themselves to understand science, but there has to be a give and take between both sides. People must do a better job of educating themselves, while scientists must also make their work more accessible to ordinary people who are not trained in science, but are definitely affected by it.
ReplyDelete