NEARLY 20 years ago the published a book called to address what it recognised as a pressing need for greater scientific literacy in the general population. Better awareness of scientific ideas and ways of thinking was required, it said, to help people understand how science and technology are shaping our world. Without that understanding, ordinary citizens would be less able to take part in decisions about such challenges as climate change and the ethics of new medical advances.
The urgency felt by the AAAS two decades ago was prompted by alarming statistics about the decline in scientific literacy during the preceding quarter century, as measured by high school student performance and polling on levels of public informedness. That decline was not unique to the US, and little has happened to reverse it, despite the fact that scientific and technological advances have accumulated with increasing rapidity since. Today, the idea of democratic debate about the promises and perils of such advances is almost empty, or at best comes to life only when particular problems arise, usually in crude and simplistic form, about such matters as stem cell research, genetically modified food crops, or surveillance technologies that threaten civil liberties.
Keeping abreast of what is happening in science and technology should be a matter of course for thoughtful people, no matter what their educational background or occupation. The availability of many quality magazines and books that make awareness of science possible for those without formal training in it means there is no excuse for people to be ill-informed. Of course, active engagement in any branch of science requires expertise, but an intelligent appreciation of reports about the outcomes, significance and possible applications of research does not.
Advertisement
This is one part of what is meant by scientific literacy. Another is being able to use science awareness in decisions about one鈥檚 own health, exercise, diet and personal responsibility for the environment 鈥� when considering domestic recycling and energy use, for example. A third and equally important part is being able to take an informed and hence responsible stance on issues that vex society, a stance that might, say, influence how one votes.
鈥淪cientific literacy lets us take an informed stance on issues that vex society鈥�
In 1995, the defined scientific literacy as 鈥渒nowledge and understanding of the scientific concepts and processes required for personal decision-making, participation in civic and cultural affairs, and economic productivity鈥�. This is a somewhat eccentric definition, which only partly overlaps the one just suggested. It leaves out the biggest boon that scientific literacy can confer: the development of rational attitudes.
By this I mean the kind of healthy scepticism that asks for good evidence and good argument, that applies critical scrutiny to propositions or claims, that suspends judgement while the evidence is pending, and accepts what the evidence says once it has arrived, independently of prior wishes or partisan beliefs.
There is nothing Utopian about this sketch of the scientific mindset, which simply describes it at its workaday best. In an age of resurgent irrationalism, in which assertive religious constituencies promote world views and ethical outlooks that run diametrically counter to science 鈥� think creationism and opposition to therapeutic cloning 鈥� scientific rationality is at a premium. Yet fewer and fewer people can appreciate what that means: which is why promoting general scientific literacy has become more urgent than ever.