"Science on a Sweatshirt"

I am subscribed to the eSkeptic newsletter, and this book review
is in the current issue. I felt it might be thought provoking to
share it.


Science on a Sweatshirt

a book review by David Ludden

In Just a Theory: Exploring the Nature of Science, computer scientist Moti
Ben-Ari gives a simple heuristic for distinguishing scientific from
pseudoscientific theories: if the theory can be written on a sweatshirt, it
is probably a scientific theory. This heuristic works because scientific
theories are concise and coherent; they can either be written out in
succinct mathematical notation or in terse language. On the other hand,
pseudoscientific theories lack conciseness because they rely on ad hoc
explanations, and they lack coherence because they are at odds with
established fields of science.

The distinction between science and pseudoscience is a theme that runs
throughout the book. According to Ben-Ari, one distinguishing feature of
science is its universality. Although science arose in Renaissance Europe,
it is in no way dependent on European culture. In support of this claim,
Ben-Ari cites the rapid development of science and technology in Japan at
the end of the 19th century, even though Japanese culture, especially at
that time, was quite different from European culture. This universality
also gives science its strength: ?Science is international, so if one
country is in the grip of a flawed theory, scientists in another country
can carry forward work on competing theories? (p. 111). Ben-Ari discusses
Lysenkoism and the demise of biology in the U.S.S.R. during the 20th
century. There is also an important lesson for the United States. The
fundamentalism movement may succeed in stymieing research here in the U.S.
in areas it disapproves of, such as stem cells. However, scientists in
other countries will continue pursuing research in those areas, and the end
result will simply be that America will lag behind the rest of the world.

Ben-Ari devotes much of his book to dealing with various misrepresentations
of science. One example is the ?They laughed at Galileo? argument, often
used to defend pseudoscientific thinking. Ben-Ari points out that no one
ever laughed at Galileo. On the contrary, it was because his argument was
so convincing that the Church viewed it as a serious threat to its
religious and political interests, and that is why it felt compelled to
silence him. Such is the case with the theory of evolution today. Because
the argument for evolution is so convincing, it is perceived as a threat by
the Religious Right, who will use any political ploy to suppress the
teaching of this theory.

Scientists, on the other hand, do not feel the need to suppress novel
ideas, although they may dismiss them if the arguments supporting them are
not convincing. An example of this would be Alfred Wegener, whose
continental drift theory was dismissed by his contemporaries because no
known mechanism could account for the drift. However, when the theory of
plate tectonics provided the necessary mechanism, Wegener?s arguments
quickly convinced most geologists. As Ben-Ari comments: ?Great scientific
discoveries are not necessarily immediately accepted, but the transition
period from disbelief to acceptance is relatively short ? until the
preponderance of evidence convinces scientists to accept the theory? (p.
92). Ben-Ari goes on to comment that if there were any plausible mechanism
to explain astrology, for example, ?scientists would compete for the honor
of discovering the details? (p. 93). After more than two thousand years,
however, no such mechanism has ever been found.

Another misrepresentation of science is what Ben-Ari calls natural
theology, an umbrella term he uses to refer to creationism and its various
mutations, including intelligent design theory (ID). Ben-Ari does not
refute creationist or ID arguments on a point-by-point basis, but he does
point out two logical flaws inherent in all versions of natural theology.
The first flaw is that it is based on the ?god of the gaps? argument.
Whenever there is a gap in scientific knowledge, especially in the areas of
geology and biology, natural theologians invoke the ?god hypothesis?; if
scientists fill that gap, they go in search of a new gap. Hence, the ?god
hypothesis? is non-falsifiable. The second flaw in natural theology
involves the either-or fallacy, which is the assumption that there are only
two possibilities for a given situation. Creationists argue that there are
only two explanations for human origins, evolution or divine creation. They
then go on to claim that there are problems with evolutionary theory and
that therefore divine creation is the only plausible explanation for human
origins. Ben-Ari attributes the use of this fallacious argument to a ?lack
of imagination in postulating possibilities,? but it could also reflect a
sheer ignorance of the subject matter. Because every culture has a
different creation myth (of which Genesis is just one), there is a
multitude of possible alternatives to the theory of evolution.

Ben-Ari is no more sympathetic to Stephen Jay Gould?s idea of non-
overlapping magisterial, or NOMA. On this view, ?Science and religion are
deemed to have authority in different areas of human life ? science
describes the natural world, while religion prescribes how humans should
live their lives in terms of ethics and morals? (p. 134). NOMA is a
philosophy that enables scientists with religious beliefs to reconcile
their faith with their scientific vocation. However, Ben-Ari points out two
difficulties with this philosophy. First, the philosophy of NOMA is too
subtle for the ordinary person, who wants simple answers to simple
questions. Second, NOMA can be regarded ?as an attempt to evade dealing
with religion in scientific terms? (p. 135) by setting religion off-limits
to scientific inquiry.

At the other end of the spectrum, Ben-Ari deals with misrepresentations of
science committed by postmodernists. For example, some postmodernists have
interpreted Gödel?s incompleteness theorems as indicating that mathematics
and science are somehow incomplete, and that therefore there are alternate,
equally valid ways of gaining knowledge about the universe. Here,
postmodernists use the term ?incomplete? in a way totally inconsistent with
the way Gödel used the term. Considering the postmodernist argument that
mathematics is nothing more than a game invented by mathematicians, Ben-Ari
compares math with chess in the following thought experiment. Supposing we
came into contact with an advanced extraterrestrial civilization ? would
you expect these extraterrestrials to know the Pythagorean Theorem? Of
course we would, even though it would have a different name and notation.
On the other hand, would we expect any of these extraterrestrials to know
how to play chess? No.

To Ben-Ari, postmodernism not only misrepresents science, it also
represents a danger to society. Granted that science has historically been
the domain of white Christian men, Ben-Ari argues that the universality of
science nevertheless makes it accessible to people of all backgrounds.
?Postmodernism, which champions the right of marginalized groups like women
and nonwhites to different ?ways of thinking,? is paradoxically guiding
[scholars from underprivileged backgrounds] into pointless activities that
will marginalize them even further, instead of encouraging them to strive
for achievement in activities where their origin is truly irrelevant? (p.
125). Science, then, is the great social equalizer because it is
independent of culture.

Ben-Ari?s clear and engaging writing style makes this book very accessible,
even to those who are not scientifically literate. Just a Theory provides a
lucid explanation of the scientific process in layperson?s terms, and it
clarifies the difference between scientific and pseudoscientific thinking.
This book could also serve as an excellent supplementary reading in almost
any introductory science or research methods course at the college level.
At the same time, the book is sufficiently thought provoking for the
practicing scientist as well, especially one who has been called on to
explain exactly what it is that scientists do.


eSkeptic is a free, public newsletter published (almost) weekly by the
Skeptics Society. Contents are Copyright © 2006 Michael Shermer, the
Skeptics Society, and the authors and artists. Permission is granted to
print, distribute, and post with proper citation and acknowledgment.

www.skeptic.com





Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: "Science on a Sweatshirt"
    ... Such is the case with the theory of evolution today. ... As Ben-Ari comments: "Great scientific ... preponderance of evidence convinces scientists to accept the theory" (p. ... On this view, "Science and religion are ...
    (sci.geo.earthquakes)
  • Re: NBC VENTING
    ... > belief in 2005 then I will happily condemn religion as superstitious ... Weird Science on the Religious Right ... "Condoms are full of holes" ... scientists at Columbia University showed that by saying appropriate ...
    (rec.music.artists.springsteen)
  • Dover decision Redux
    ... endorsement of religion. ... mere re-labeling of creationism, ... position, ID is not science. ... scientists cannot explain today how biological systems evolved does not ...
    (talk.origins)
  • The Quran and Modern Science
    ... Based upon extracts from the video The Truth. ... RELIGION and SCIENCE have always been considered to be twin sisters by Islam ... Professor Moore presented his findings to scientists at ...
    (soc.culture.pakistan)
  • The Quran and Modern Science
    ... Based upon extracts from the video The Truth. ... RELIGION and SCIENCE have always been considered to be twin sisters by Islam ... Professor Moore presented his findings to scientists at ...
    (soc.culture.iranian)