Science people and beliefs

Knowledge can’t guaranty happiness of the people but it makes free them

What doesn’t mean be free when we are only a path to walk? And if exists more lanes to follow when you only knows the existence of one, Where is our election?  Only when we know different possibilities for choosing, we can exercise the freedom.
Dictatorial and other powers always prove to cut the general knowledge. When people have a small world they have greater security and trends to believe in unquestionable truths, so people accept resignedly the power dictates.  Sometimes is the own academy what closes in a crystal jail it, under pretext of majority of people doesn’t be ready to get it, therefore hide in back of this ascension there is often fear to lose their privileged position.  But the main wall that knowledge must thought is indeed the people resistance.

 

Children have a natural predisposition to learn. They need to learn because sooner or later they must take their site in society. They have a great curiosity and “why” is the word that more uses them. Time runs and children become adults and our brain changes its needs of knowledge: it wins in efficiency but it reduces capacity of learn. However humans never lost desire of play what is a kind of learning or the curiosity. At different of animals rest adult human have ability of learn all the life, while animals lost this ability when they pass to adults.
People can learn all the life but this is a very hard work and often they prefer to give the resolution a thirst people. This attitude isn’t surprising because around of 50% of energy need with our body is used by brain, so body tends to save energy and the form is thinking the essential.  Hannah Baker in her paper “The public don't want to be involved in science policy” talk about people don’t want to get involved in science because they can’t enough understand what’s talking about; and her solution is a better formation. In other hand Melanie Smallman and Simon Lock replies her in “Let's be clear about science education and engagement” where correct data interpretation and second skepticism about the science is due for more components apart of ignorance: wrong spectates, religion beliefs, dark interests… definitely people could be ignorant but they recognize what science did about their lives, at the same time what can destroy of them which they feel excluded.
Obviously a little of everything there are in people attitude about science. But it’s hard think about questions where information is biased sometimes for economic interest. People are in front of mount of information which is arriving disordered. But the worst thing that people must fear is what consequences could has this information.
Exist the myth of the Renaissance Man, Leonardo da Vinci is a very clear example. They were people that paint, write, research… all fields of knowledge were covering for them. Today this figure is seeing incompatible with modern times because the current Knowledge is uncovering by one person. However one person in XVI century can’t cover all knowledge too, real Renaissance man was a wise but he/she* didn’t know everything, their knowledge was global, everything was relating with everything. Today knowledge is parceled and sometimes scientist ignores basics concepts of beside discipline. For example geologist finds a new method of dill oil but they forget what consequences has by environment; geologist are evil no, they only ignore things out of their discipline. Medical, industry, architecture only thing in their discipline and they never propagate their actions at the other aspects of world. If we want that people involves in science we must shows a global vision of it, we must return at Renaissance man.
But a global vision doesn’t mean a unique thinking. In renaissance, people which dedicates at knowledge had more vision of world. Sometimes one coincides in other with some aspects but in other aspects no. This wealth of vision was what grown the knowledge and carry us where we are. The existence of global vision of thing opens the doors of people which wasn’t scientist (but with enough money) could get the knowledge offers.
The winner of lack of overview is the beliefs. Religions and all kind of pseudoscience have a global vision of world. They have answers that never open new questions. People can generally people are not prepared to discuss whether an amino acid is better than another, but the kind of meal that we eat; because fist is very specific thing that requires more previous information but second is general and only requires interest in it. Current science is losing in specific aspects and it left the general aspects in the hand of charlatans which satisfied people needed of information.
To think that that people aren’t interested in science is totally unfounded. But people don’t want get a PhD for understand what is talking about. Einstein said that his work consisted in to explain physic theories at his grandmother. Science must shows at people in language of them and in their referents. Out of this premises science will become in Hermitic philosophy which hided the knowledge at uninitiated.

In short people are being displaced knowledge, and they find other lanes to satisfice their need of information. In other hand policy and economics interest often lay about benefits of science. In front or there people prefer not find and so not suffer.  

 

*In the XVI XVII and XVIII century there were many women erudite, more than Historian books shows. High class women had a lot of time that waste in learn, and to be erudite raised the woman value from marriage: better education of sons, interested conversation and better social consideration of couple. Sometimes we think that high society of pass is that current and it hadn’t interest in science, but scientists living at that time invited to the homes of high society were exhibit their findings, in front the curiosity view of his hosts.