According to the latest issue of Scientific American, science has created high-paying and productive jobs in the United States, and science is the only way to create them in the future. Certainly, both candidates for President seem to agree with the need for high-paying jobs… or at least pay lip service to the idea. And the Republicans, especially, are pounding on the need for more high-paying and productive jobs.
So why are so many Republicans so anti-science? Why do they deny evolution, global climate change, vaccination, the seriousness of air pollution, and other findings? Early in 2011, Mitt Romney made a speech in which indicated that it appeared global warming was human-caused, then quickly made an about-face after Rush Limbaugh blasted him. John Huntsman, on the other hand, said that the Republican Party couldn’t “run from science,” and not quite coincidentally came in last among all the Republican candidates.
Science was one of the guiding principles of the Founding Fathers. Benjamin Franklin was one of the world’s leading scientists of his time, although this aspect of his accomplishments often tends to be downplayed. Thomas Jefferson believed deeply in scientific endeavor and even created his own inventions. John Adams extolled the scientific method and the verification and use of facts.
So why has there been such a surge in anti-science sentiment in recent years? And why especially among Republicans [not that Democrats are immune]?
Part of the anti-science movement may be based on the desire for quick and simple answers, and science doesn’t work that way. Scientists set forth theories, and other scientists try to disprove them… and often they do… or often they discover that one theory is an approximation of the way something works, and a later theory gives a better explanation. Science is, if you will, methodically messy, and this century’s “truth” often is later discredited.
For all of its messiness, science has a far better record in explaining both the world and how things work than does religion, and yet Republicans in ever-greater percentages are choosing religious rationales and explanations over science. Perhaps it’s the fact that a conservative mind-set values “certainty” in beliefs over something that changes… or maybe religion is more comforting. Yet these same Republicans certainly wouldn’t turn in their car for a horse and buggy. Nor would they prefer the medicine of 1850 to that of today, no matter how much they complain about the costs. They embrace all the physical advantages of science while rejecting the methodology… and anything in science that conflicts with their religion or beliefs.
Not only is this philosophically hypocritical, but it’s a fundamental threat to the future of the United States. Interestingly enough, both candidates are campaigning for better education in the science-based disciplines of engineering, mathematics, and other hard sciences… and yet in state after state Republican lawmakers are passing anti-science laws… on the grounds, largely, that impartial science education undermines religious freedom. John Adams would be appalled to discover that religious freedom requires the suppression of unpleasant facts and theories and that “religious” theories with no basis in fact must be given “equal time.” He’d also be appalled to find that politicians are attempting to insert religious beliefs into law under the guise of freedom of religion.
And so should every American.