“Rah, rah, rah! Fight, fight, fight for your desire to write!” Elise Hancock’s cheerleading tactics inspires
me to pack my survival kit and traipse into the wild world of science writing. Although I may not yet know how to use a compass,
my passion for all things science provides the sustenance needed to begin my
foray. My incessant curiosity, bane of
my mother’s life for many years, provides a vital component to my science
writers’ tool kit. As I spoke to my
parents this afternoon, I barely restrained my bubbling glee for I had just
discovered that my “irritating” inherent inquisitiveness was not only useful,
but desired. Yes!
Elise
Hancock’s sage words captivated me as she invited me into her world, introduced
me to potential readers, and sensibly mentored me as a future science writer. Her ingenious ability to weave knowledge and
inspiration together while delightfully providing a gold mine of information
left me hungry for more.
Heuristic?
Epistemology? Reading Michael
Polanyi’s article, “Scientific Controversy,” sent me immediately to www.dictionary.com . Wisdom abounds, no doubt, but I did find myself
reading and re-reading the passages
several times for clarity.
Although the article is decades old, mankind’s
tendencies to accept or refuse new scientific ideas remains constant. Mr. Polanyi refers to hostile audiences who “deliberately refuse to entertain novel
conceptions such as those of Freud, Eddington, Rhine or Lysenko, precisely
because its members fear that once they have accepted this framework they will
be led to conclusions which they --- rightly or wrongly --- abhor.” Replace the scientists’ names for an
issue such as climate change and it is evident that certain segments of the
population grip tightly to their “beliefs” rather than expanding their
education as scientific knowledge progresses.
As Mr. Polanyi so aptly observes scientific arguments may not be about
science at all. Rather they are
conflicts “between . . . extraneous
interests interfering illegitimately with the due process of scientific
enquiry.” He refers to the
emotional opposition to Copernicanism and its principle that “scientific truth shall take no account of
its religious or moral repercussions.”
Although we know that the Earth
revolves around the sun, the same emotional oppositions play out on the battlefields
concerning evolution and climate change.
I once heard astrophysicist Neil deGrasse-Tyson explain that science isn’t
about what you “believe,” it is about the natural laws of our universe. He asked if we, the audience, thought gravity
would cease to exist if people didn’t believe in it. Science laws stand alone, regardless of
societies’ belief systems or religions.
Science writers often walk the tightrope between the science that is and
enticing reluctant audiences to listen and consider the science that
exists. If a writer immediately
alienates a potential audience before imparting any knowledge the opportunity
to educate has evaporated. The delicate
dance of engaging your partner, the reader, without stepping on their feet
before guiding them to listen to a different rhythm is complicated. The article illuminates the fact that even
though science is about facts, the emotional aspect cannot be dissected out of
scientific discussion.
Jon Mooallem’s article, “The Love That Dare Not Squawk Its
Name,” was quite frankly, a bit of a mind f*#k.
I began reading an article on Laysa Albatross, naturally expecting this
to be a scientific account of the albatross.
Which it was… I think.
Certainly,
I learned about the Laysa Albatross’ habit, mannerisms, and quirky
behaviors. The transition from a typical
science article to a political/religious commentary (not necessarily the author’s)
on homosexuality surprised me.
Although Lindsay Young, the scientist studying
the Laysa Albatross on Oahu, is careful to eliminate anthropomorphism when
describing the birds’ behaviors, Mr. Mooallem shows no such caution. Instead, he elucidates the political and
religious ramifications of the birds’ homosexual behavior. The article was extremely successful in
expanding my knowledge. It would have
never occurred to me that a bird’s behavior in the wild could be politicized or
prove to be a point of contention in the realms of religion. How one subject bled into the other was astonishing.
Mr. Mooallem led his reader by the hand into this blended world gently, but
firmly. I’m impressed and want to read
more by this author.
QUESTION ON, FELLOW SEEKERS OF KNOWLEDGE!!!
Images respectively:
lorisreflections.com
alexautindotcom.wordpress.com
thesanpedrocoast.com
gridirongirl.org
