[Cross-posted from
Sentient Developments]
"My only wish is…to transform friends of God into friends
of man, believers into thinkers, devotees of prayer into devotees of
work, candidates for the hereafter into students of the world,
Christians who, by their own procession and admission, are "half
animal, half angel" into persons, into whole persons."
– Ludwig Feuerbach
There’s a current billboard in Toronto that reads, “Literacy is a right.”
Now,
we’ve all be told to believe that rights are nonsense on stilts, but
there is a certain significance to these sorts of proclamations.
Clearly, when someone declares something to be a ‘human right’ they are
making a very serious claim. They have pinpointed something they feel
no person should have to do without, whether it be protection against
racial discrimination, access to clean water, or in this case, the
ability to read.
The impetus behind these sorts of social
efforts is the assurance that persons be guaranteed the most basic
tools and protections required to get through life fairly and safely.
In the case of reading, it is generally acknowledged that illiteracy
debilitates a person to the point where they experience undue
difficulty engaging in all that life and society has to offer.
Interestingly,
there’s a normative aspect to these sorts of ‘endowments’ and
privileges. A few centuries ago most people did not need to know how to
read to get through life. Today, however, it is near impossible – hence
the call for literacy as a basic right.
But it’s not just the
ability to read that is crucial today. Given the intricacies of the
modern age and the ever-growing complexification of ideas and
technology, it can be said that a scientific education is also
increasingly necessary; if literacy can be considered a basic right,
then so to must
scientific literacy.
Yet,
far too few people
truly understand science and technology today. This is proving to be
extremely problematic, particularly at the dawn of what looks to be a
transformative future. Scientific illiteracy, quite unfortunately,
appears to be an issue that will only get worse and create a slew of
social problems.
Including the ongoing entrenchment and spread of religion.
We
currently live at a time when rationality and tolerance have never been
more important to the human species. Religion, with all its prejudices
and devotion to ignorance, continues to present a threat to not just
healthy and inquisitive minds, but to civilization itself.
Consequently,
we need to place a much higher value on a scientific education. Simply
put, there’s no better way to inoculate against religion and other
forms of misinformation and unhealthy thinking habits. Our children
deserve the right to a scientific, critical mind.
Soft memetic engineeringIndeed,
the only truly effective and ethical way to combat viral religious
memes is to nip them in the bud and prevent them from taking root in
the first place. Prevention is what’s required rather than a cure.
Memetic theory
-- the notion that ideas replicate by spreading from mind to mind –
suggests that memes are only effective if they find a home in a
sympathetic brain. The ability of a meme to take root in someone’s
consciousness is a reflection of its ability to exploit human
psychology (consequently, memetics can be thought of the science of
understanding how human psychology responds to information). But this
is only part of the story. Not all minds are alike, and not everyone is
subject to the same information acquisition/transmission tendencies.
There
are currently 6.6 billion human minds on the planet in various states
of memetic receptiveness. Owing to new technologies, many these minds
have unprecedented access to the world’s information. The current
memepool is an anarchic mix of ideas bursting open like the Cambrian
Explosion --each idea waiting for the opportunity to copy itself from
one mind to another.
These conditions are the result of human
ingenuity, creativity and tolerance. In free societies memes remain
largely unchecked and are allowed to proliferate and mutate at will. In
liberal democracies we consider freedom of speech and the right to free
expression as among our highest values.
We also live in a world,
quite thankfully, where people cannot be coerced into adopting a
specific mindset. This was attempted in the 20th century by
totalitarian Marxist regimes who, in the case of religion, banned
spiritual practices, burned down churches and executed priests. The end
result, particularly in post-Soviet Russia, was a religious community
who survived the persecution only to come back with more power and
fervor than before.
In other words, it backfired.
Indeed, this kind of ideological ‘
memetic engineering’ is very much frowned upon today and should not be considered a viable solution in the struggle to maintain cultural health.
Unfortunately,
however, there are consequences to having an anarchic memepool, namely
the unchecked proliferation of misinformation, superstition, and of
course, religion. These types of ideas are more than mere falsities,
they create problems as well. Recently in Canada, for example,
Catholic girls were nearly denied vaccinations for for human papillomavirus,
a sexually transmitted disease. As a result, these girls were put at
risk of developing cervical cancer on account of religious sexual
taboos.
As Thomas H. Hulxey once noted, “Irrationally held
truths may be more harmful than reasoned errors.” As we can attest to
today, religious notions are interfering with the quality of human
lives, whether it be public health issues, hallucinations of an
intelligent designer or the blood lust of a suicidal would-be martyrs.
Thankfully,
there is a gentle and elegant way to steer people in the direction of
truth and rationality – what we can call a soft form of memetic
engineering. I’m speaking, of course, of scientific literacy. Given our
society's laws and values, the best we can do is to prime minds in such
a way that they are equipped to fend off superstitious nonsense. A mind
in tune with scientific methodology can better sterilize religious
memes, and at the same time guard against other psychological pot-holes
like pseudoscience and conspiratorial paranoia.
A way of thinking
A
scientific education consists of more than just memorizing the periodic
table of the elements or understanding Newton’s basic laws. In addition
to these things it is the acquisition of the skeptical mind and the
capacity for critical thought. Carl Sagan once noted that, “Science is
a way of thinking much more than it is a body of knowledge.”
Skepticism
should be considered a virtue and a redeeming characteristic. Physicist
Richard Feynman agreed, “There is no harm in doubt and skepticism, for
it is through these that new discoveries are made.” Conversely, Richard
Dawkins describes the religious mind as being unimaginative, not
poetic, not soulful. “On the contrary, they are parochial,
small-minded, niggardly with the human imagination, precisely where
science is generous,” he says.
Needless to say a number of
things have to change. The education system needs to be reformed, while
popular media needs to take on a more positive outlook when it comes to
science.
Take school, for example. In addition to regular
science classes students should have lessons dedicated to critical and
healthy thinking (including lessons in
emotional intelligence). These classes should teach the
scientific method,
empiricism, how to recognize
biases and
extraordinary claims, and how to properly source data and work with credible sources.
This
would go a long way in making the learning of science much more
palatable for students. Today, most students, particularly girls, find
it off-putting. It’s geek stuff. It’s supposed to be hard. Moreover,
science is often relegated to the sidelines in favour of easier or more
romantic and exciting subjects, including athletics.
Districts
should establish pro-science campaigns and bring in expert speakers and
science-focused entertainers. Schools need more money, better
equipment, and enthusiastic teachers. Students should have more time
allocated each week to learning about science and critical thinking.
Pop culture needs more positive role models like
Bill Nye and outspoken individuals like Richard Dawkins and the late Carl Sagan.
Science can be sexy. It just has to presented that way.
Liberal education and home schooling
All
of this, of course, cannot happen in a vacuum; science most certainly
needs to be part of a broader liberal education. Students should
understand the width and breadth of the world and avoid the insular
thinking that characterizes religious minds and communities.
To
this end, schools should introduce students to psychology, history and
cultural studies at an earlier age. World religions should be taught to
expand otherwise limited faith-based views, thus greatly reducing
xenophobia and general lack of awareness. It would also establish a
sense of humility and reduce notions of cultural relativism.
As
for the issue of home schooling, yes, parents deserve the right to keep
their kids at home or send them to private faith-based schools.
But
such a decision may eventually come at a price. Standardized testing
should be implemented and no student should be able to earn a high
school diploma without a solid grasp of the basics of science and its
methodology. Should some parents insist on teaching creationism instead
of evolution, their children will have to face the consequences. The
outcome may be that faith-based schooling will eventually carry a
stigma. It’s conceivable that these children will have low
employability and have difficultly earning admission to universities.
Democratic process
An
implicit assumption in a democracy is that the collective actions of an
informed populace will be to the benefit of both individuals and the
community. The world, in order to be properly comprehended, and for an
individual to fully engage in life, is increasingly dependent on
persons having a scientific rather than a metaphysical interpretation
of existence. Today, without critical thinkers, democracy and effective
governance is in peril.
Moreover, given the complexity of
today’s technologies and the dire consequences (or benefits!) of their
development, the need to address global scale problems has never been
more important. Scientific minds are absolutely necessary to not just
identify these problems, but to solve them as well. Today we face such
calamities as global warming and the spread of catastrophic diseases.
It should be noted that
many Christian evangelists are global warming deniers
-- not because they claim any special scientific knowledge, but because
they are skeptical of any scientific claim, and any other 'belief
system' like environmentalism that could rival their own. This is a
recipe for disaster.
Close-mindedness is not what's required
here; instead, we need dynamic and effective people to help humanity
deal with problems like climate change.
Helping people and societyScientific
illiteracy is an impairment. Individuals without the capacity for
critical and rational thought are increasingly having a difficult time
understanding their world and relating to ‘mainstream’ society. There
is a growing divide between the secular and religious worlds, giving
rise to two distinct cultures who are increasingly unable to converse
with each other.
Worse, those individuals who embrace more
extreme or fundamentalist versions of religion feel increasingly
alienated by modern society. The urge is to rail against the tide
rather than seek a kind of reconciliation or understanding; cultural
relations ends up regressing to an 'us versus them' mentality.
But a common ground
does exist. Science is the universal language.
If literacy can be declared a right, then so too must scientific literacy. The health of individuals and society depends on it.