邪惡的加法

四月 16, 2008

紀錄片 Expelled! 的主題之一, 就是控告科學界不允許神創論有發言的機會. 任何有常識的人都馬上可以看出來這是多麼愚蠢的立場. 科學界也不允許算命, 星象… 等等錯誤的理論有發言的機會. 錯誤的理論是不值得一提的.

不過有些受過高等人文教育的人, 居然也會使用同樣的邏輯. 我的朋友論文口試, 因為他有許多人文學系的朋友, 當天有一小群非科學家來捧場.

結束之後, 我們一群人在外面聊天. 其中有一個人說: “我雖然不懂統計, 不過我不能贊同他計算平均數 (average). 人都是不一樣的, 有各種差異, 怎麼可以平均在一起!” 另外一個人馬上說: “沒錯沒錯, 這個世界上的事, 通常是毫無共識的, 不過科學家就是用計算平均的方法, 來消滅小數人的意見.” 他們兩個接下來想要教我們如何做科學.

當場的科學家試圖教育他們, 跟他們解釋這些統計量的意義, 不過他們不想聽. 他們堅持 “加法” 是邪惡的. 請注意, 這兩個人不是無知的大學生. 他們其中一個已經是大學教授, 另一個也快要成為教授了. 恐怖吧. 他們可能比神創論者還糟糕. 神創論者不相信演化論, 這兩個有博士頭銜的人不相信加法.

高等社會科學教育, 應該是給學生足夠的工具, 讓他們能用量化的方法, 正確的描述社會現象. 但我常常看到的是他們反而在鼓勵一種偏執狂 (paranoia).

5 回應 to “邪惡的加法”

  1. st 說:

    還好,我認識的某國家研究單位的社會學老師都很重視統計。 :D

  2. pyridine 說:

    st: 所以我才說 “有些” 人文學學者. 我知道大部的社會科學都是很量化的.

  3. Swirljem 說:

    Well, “highly educated” people are not by default logical. The degree of misunderstanding (or lack of understanding) about science by the general public (especially in America) is frightening. Carl Sagan did a great job raising the awareness and the urgency of this matter in his book The Demon-Haunted World: Science As a Candle in the Dark, which I enjoyed very much. Wishful thinking for me to see this book to become a “must read” in US high school syllabus.

    In America, I see a double standard about science - people cheer for the fact that technology, a product of scientific advancement, improves life. But as soon as science crosses the line to anything else (religion, ethics, even economics to a certain extent) then you will hear the outcry from thousands of critics. It’s like science had become a monster stepping all over their dignity. Weird mentality it is but very difficult to understand.

    PS - I stumble across your blog randomly but truly enjoy it. Keep up the good work!

  4. pyridine 說:

    Swirljem: Thank you for reading! The Demon-Haunted World was one of the first books that introduced me to skepticism. Sagan used to offer a class in Cornell about critifical thinking. I think all universities should offer similar class.

  5. pyridine 說:

    sorrry, critical not “critifical”. I think I just invented a new word!

留言