This was written for a college biology class. I never learned science as my parents do not believe in it, so I had to deal with some new ideas I had never faced before.

The scientific method is essential for humanity to continue in a positive way. Being able to think critically is one of the most important aspects of being a functioning adult, and has the potential to bring all of us together instead of breaking us apart.

It is said “the average empire breaks down at around 250 years” (Feed), and America is getting awfully close to that milestone. Though that may not be the case and there are many examples of empires that last longer than that benchmark, the Byzantine, British and the Ottoman empires just to name a few (Feed), it is obvious the American self-thoughts of superiority are fading in the average mind.

What makes an empire decline? The lack of critical thinking.

There is currently a problem of people that only think what what they were taught growing up, and if they had it their way, America was, is, and should remain, a theocracy. There is a surprising number of people who believe men have less ribs than women, forty percent of Americans believe the earth was created in six days with no evolutionary help (Brenan), and around 12% of Americans believe in science “not too much, or not at all (Funk).

This shows little critical thinking, if any at all.

There is no critical thinking in what science does for us as a whole, is a dangerous mindset to have, as without science, humanity would have surely died out completely by this point.

Science was able to craft a response to the Covid pandemic in a relatively fast time saving lives.

Science was able to find a way to live with diabetes.

Science was able to find a way to safely live with HIV.

Science got us to the moon.

Science promotes the advancement and longevity of humanity, while those not believing in science are holding us back, and we wonder why the culture war in America is getting worse and worse.

Without science and critical thinking, humanity would be at a standstill and unable to survive, let alone thrive. It is important to focus on all problems with the scientific method. Without the acceptance of science, people simply read what they agree with, and their confirmation bias hides the truth from them (Casad).

Believe it or not, science has solved many problems from the times many holy books were written. The problem, is there are some in society that do not want to look past their allegorical holy books, and see science as an atheistic creed to lure their precious little children away from the good lord. Ricky Gervais put it best by saying:

“… Science is constantly proved all the time. You see, if we take something like any fiction, any holy book… and destroyed it, in a thousand years’ time, that wouldn’t come back just as it was. Whereas if we took every science book, and every fact, and destroyed them all, in a thousand years they’d all be back, because all the same tests would [produce] the same result.” (Late Show, Gervais).

Without the ability to look past the way we were taught, society stagnates. It is important to look at every problem and figure out the best way around it that is beneficial for everyone, and not just one group of people. The scientific method is a way for one to look beyond our egos, and to see the world for what it truly is instead of our interpretation of it.

In 2014, a debate took place between Bill Nye the Science Guy, and Ken Hamm, between evolution and young earth creationism. When asked what it would take for them to change their mind, Bill Nye responded with “science, facts, and proof,” while Ken Ham said “nothing could ever change his mind” (Nye and Ham).

This shows the difference of someone who thinks with a scientific mind, and someone that looks at the world through religion-tinted glasses.

If we look at every problem without a scientific mindset, we as a society get beat by every problem. If we look at every problem through the scientific method, society can work together and find solutions for most problems. It may take time, but we will get there.

If we have a question, research it, and follow the scientific method before we form our personal opinion, society would benefit as a whole instead of just for the few. Imagine if everyone got the Covid vaccine as soon as it was available instead of not trusting the science and only getting their information from their small ecosystems of misinformation and lies?

Imagine how many lives would have been saved?

Many people died needlessly because of their beliefs, and the conspiracy theory the government and Bill Gates wants to track them. If we were to look at their hypothesis, we could show the data after millions of doses, our DNA remains intact, we are not magnetic, and Bill Gates does not have a clue who or where we are at any given time.

How many data points are enough to prove a point? Linda Stephenson is an adjunct statistics professor at Columbia Basin College, and responded to a letter to the editor in the Tri-City Herald in 2007. The initial letter to the editor claimed “a sample size of 1,000 cannot be accurate with public sentiment.” Stephenson responded with “a sample size of 1,000 people is very typical for a nationwide survey, and is usually within 3 percentage points of accuracy” (Stephenson).

Maybe this inability to trust science is simply a pride issue or a self-induced case of victim mentality. When people are told they are wrong, some take it as a personal attack. When they are told their bedrock principles are wrong, they throw up mental fences and stop listening. We are currently stuck in a landscape where science, belief, and politics are all intertwined, when they should all be separate. A majority of people believe experts should be the ones making decisions, rules, and laws (Funk, et al.), but there are those who see “big science” as an attack on their beliefs and convictions.

An extremely helpful exercise is writing a position paper for a position one personally disagrees with. This forces the mind to see the facts from a different perspective, which can create empathy for those who think differently.

There is a difference between being against someone, and simply doing what is best for themselves. Not everything is a personal attack, and there is a way for society to survive, even when we all believe different things. The old saying “live and let live” should possibly be a new national motto, but with how much we are already fighting, there’s re other problems that should be discussed and dealt with before we consider such a “radical” change such as that.

writings from the learning contrarian

The Scientific Method, Pride, and the Decline of Critical Thinking