What do you think of when you see the word “pseudoscience”? How do you understand the argument between evolution and creation, as Jacoby presents it? Please end your blog with at least one good critical question.
When I hear the word "pseudoscience" the frist thing that comes to my mind is "astrology". Astrology is the study of positions of celestial bodies in the belief that they may influence the course of natual earthly occurences and human affairs. Astrology lacks scientific method. On the other hand, "astronomy" can be considered a real science with plausible evidence. The word "pseudo" is a greek root that means false or pretending. When you add "pseudo" to the word "science" I think of false knowledge. Reliable science should be backed up with concrete evidence and plausibility, which pseudoscience lacks. Susan Jacoby's book The Age of American Unreason emphasizes the loss of devotion to scientific method. I understand Jacoby's arguement about evolution and creationism as poor education of evolution and other vital areas of knowledge emphasize public ignorance about religion and science. Tensions between science and religion have fueled the ongoing creation-evolution controversy, a religious conflict focusing on politics and public education.
As for my critical question: How much will Susan Jacoby's book impact America and push for a change?
As for my critical question: How much will Susan Jacoby's book impact America and push for a change?
No comments:
Post a Comment