A Convergence of Divergence

Today, I was privy to a public discussion of Unscientific America: How Scientific Illiteracy Threatens our Future. This discussion was far more thought provoking (though less entertaining) than yesterday's reenactment of Ovid's Ars amatoria (The Art of Love) and reminded me of a prior series of posts I had undertaken.

Actually, I was not part of the discussion (it was simply taking place in the Barnes & Noble where I was reading something else entirely). Yet, I could not help but overhear the discussion which ended up centering on the reflection of the divergence of the political parties in society (recalling parts of The Second Civil War: How Extreme Partisanship Has Paralyzed Washington and Polarized America). This divergence has converged, so to speak, to create an underclass of scientifically illiterate people which is reflected in a wide range of educational pursuits. The proposition was put forward that the cheapening of educational degrees and subsequent failure of the educational system results in creating a bipolar culture. On one hand there are those who understand, for instance, basic scientific concepts and on the other hand you have those who don't understand those concepts. In such instances you get people like Sarah Palin, people who genuinely want to combat, say, cancer but refuse to acknowledge funds for fruit fly research helps this research advance. Sarah Palin is, fundamentally, the perfect case for someone in the 'scientific underclass' (underclass, because of a lack of understanding not necessarily because of numbers in terms of 'belief'). Essentially, there is a developing litmus test (rather than rigorous educational requirements or previous work experience) for ability to perform jobs simply because such a 'test' allows easy evaluation of a person's abilities.

I'll add my two cents in here, I largely agree that someone like Sarah Palin would have a hard time working at, say, the Union of Concerned Scientists, given her scientific illiteracy. And, I agree that our educational degrees are, essentially, becoming worth less and less as more and more people are given the chance to attend higher educational institutions. I've said before, if we had rigorous educational standards in high school, standards which ensured every graduate was able to secure a job paying livable wages (as for my grandfather's generation), then college degrees would be worth far more than they are now (and meaningful research and advancement of knowledge could go on at the undergraduate level).

Fundamentally, I have to agree that litmus tests are currently increasingly necessary in terms of finding out qualifications and, sometimes, worth more than a degree. Yet, I maintain that this is not a necessary or good development. And, I know that we cannot apply this just to science but to other areas as well. I, for instance, would not consider myself to have a commanding understanding of biblical theology and that is why I think that I am able to enjoy NBC's Kings so much (because I don't know the characters or plot in the story of David) whereas I do have the Iliad all but memorized giving me much less enjoyment when watching the horribly Hollywood butchery Troy.

In a way, I think that if we are to accept the ideas of the development of an 'underclass' (in terms of understanding) it would have to be centered on the near-mythical Renaissance Man. I don't think it's practical to think that such a being can be so created within the confines of our current educational system. Therefore, we must focus on the development of those areas which are deemed most advantageous for individuals entering the workforce. I mean, honestly, a cobbler is an important skilled profession (we all need a shoe fixed at least once in our lives) but are the skills a cobbler possesses universal enough to be transferable to a profession very unlike that of a cobbler (such as a nurse)? Fundamentally, I think we need to be looking for universals within the schema of our socio-economic structure and prepare future generations in ways that allows them some sort of literacy in those areas.

I am drawn back to mathematics. When I think back over the mathematics courses I took in high school (Geometry, Algebra II, Pre-Calculus/Trigonometry, Calculus, Statistics) I always consider some worth far more than others. Statistics, by far, has proven the most useful of the bunch. Trigonometry allows me to win at pool, when I remember to do the math. Calculus helped me pass Metaphysics and was useful for Logic. But, fundamentally, I don't think Algebra II or Geometry has helped me in the least. Finding the shortest distance between two points in a room without flying through the air, Matrices, Sine, Cosine, Tangent? Yeah, I've never used a single one. Some brilliant computer programmer figured out how to map the shortest distance via Google Maps (though basic map-reading skills usually suffice in a pinch). Remodeling rooms usually requires basic tape-measure skills, not advanced mathematical formulas. Now, I know that mathematical formulas could be used throughout much of my daily life but shouldn't we be more concerned over the fact that the kid working the cash register can't make change if the power goes out rather than if I can use calculus to determine at which speed my car would perform most efficiently (or how far my body would fly if the car crashed at a certain speed)? I really think we should. (Note: I always wear a seatbelt).

Yet, I am forced to agree that the current educational system and the structure of society is, in fact, reinforcing the convergence of divergence on a wide number of issues. It just doesn't seem possible any more to have a St. Augustine, an inspiring man who wrote both in the defense of the Church and on behalf of Scientific Literacy, a pair like Leucippus and Democritus, who in the 5th Century B.C.E. discovered Atoms and Measurements of Volume, or even a Thomas More, who both Defended the Faith and the King of England.

There is certainly a break in society but it is not like those breaks in the past. This is not between the rich and poor, the black and the white, the protestant and catholic but between those with knowledge of concepts and those without knowledge of concepts. Unfortunately, those without knowledge of concepts are not blissfully ignorant but, increasingly, pressuring those with knowledge to surrender piecemeal those concepts to greater and greater regulation. Knowledge is increasingly becoming the mark of the 'elite' and militant ignorance increasingly becoming the mark of the rest of us. It's hard to make progress when a roadblock is set up not just by technical specification at the corner of innovation but when roadblocks are set up every three feet by people who don't want that progress to be made because of their own illiteracy in that pursuit.

But, I don't think all is lost. Now that we are beginning to see the problem we can begin to develop methods to limit the scope of the problem for future generations. While I don't think everyone should be required to understand why fruit flies are excellent model organisms for biologists to study, people should at least have enough understanding to figure out what is and what is not wasteful. Putting taxpayer money towards widening the entire length of I-95 versus developing sophisticated traffic control methods to fundamentally alter the traffic flow in and out of a major traffic hub like New York City should not boil down to a question of shady 'scientific' studies of the importance of widening I-95. It should boil down to an argument over the applicability of the methods developed for New York City in someplace like Atlanta. If the development of traffic control methods which ease congestion for New York City(keeping in mind the asymmetrical and chaotic nature (as in Chaos Theory) of traffic patterns)) results in the development of some fundamental principles which can be applied in places like Atlanta, Houston and LA then that is fundamentally more worthwhile than making the South-Bound stretch of I-95 in Flagler County, Florida three lanes instead of two when, clearly, traffic on that stretch isn't comparable in terms of work hours lost, environmental pollutants released, etc...

Natch Greyes is a Democrat running for Senate in 2020. His campaign platform may be found at natchgreyes.com Sphere: Related Content