Reply to comment

Because of Darwin's birthday coming up so soon, there is an abundance of articles regarding Darwin.  In the New York Times, there was a book review about two upcoming books regarding Darwin, one of them comparing him to (who else?) Lincoln.  However, it an un-Darwin related article that caught my eye recently and made me think of this class. The essay entitled "Elevating Science, Elevating Democracy" (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/27/science/27essa.html?ref=science) discusses the new pressure put on scientists after Obama annouced that "he would restore science to it's rightful place" (Elevating). 

The section that particulary surprised me was when the essayist writes that Einstein believes that he has never gained any kind of moral information from science, since science (in his mind) is pure fact and therefore truth.  The writer of this article disagrees with Einstein on the point that science is fact, stating that "this is balderdash. Science is not a monument of received Truth but something that people do to look for truth"  He even introduces this point by telling Einstein's beliefs as a "story" and observing that science as a "Truth" is only a story.  

The writer also reconfirms Professor Grobstein's point that the most valuable scientific studies are those that are incorrect, since they fuel a search for greater knowledge.  In class on Tuesday we talked about attitudes towards science and whether science has always been viewed in the "loopy" sense, or whether that view is a more modern way to look at the field.  This article presented science as something that is culturally thought of as hard facts and right answers, yet is often truly more loopy than one might think.