Our worldview is greatly influenced by our life experiences and early in childhood. Our parents greatly influence how we perceive the world around us and our relationships with others. If raised in a home that was unsafe, it’s likely that we would develop mistrust in our relationships. Similarly, if raised in an safe environment where we felt nurtured, loved, and protected than it is likely that we will learn to trust others. This is a very basic understanding of the Nature vs. Nurture argument that specialists have been arguing about for years. Author Joy DeGruy seemed, to sum up, this theory when she stated in her book that: “We carry our painful experiences into our adulthood, and they become the basis for our worldview,” which is defined as our beliefs, our attitudes, and our response to the natural environment. Just as our parents influenced our worldview, historic racism also influenced our environment. An environment that is unsafe will always produce insecurity.
The topic of Evolution exposes the our insecurity because it forces us to address the nature Vs nurture argument. Most of us reject evolution in favor of a feel-good explanation of life, not because we understand evolution, but because of hate science, and the premise of a gradual development that is categorally opposed to intelligent design. We are much more comfortable with pseudo claims of extraterrestrials, astro-projections, and gene splicing than science because it allows us to escape and avoid taking responsibility our problems using science that forced is evaluate what does and what does not work. Scientific literacy is defined as “knowledge and understanding of scientific concepts and processes required for personal decision-making, participation in civic and cultural affairs, and economic productivity.”
In itself the rejection of evolution does not equate to scientific illiteracy. However, the implications of having leaders who are scientifically illiterate is detrimental to our survival and growth. The community must achieve a level of scientific literacy; otherwise, we will never progress. According to the National Science Education Standards defines scientific literacy means that a person can ask, find, or determine answers to questions that are derived from curiosity about everyday experiences. Therefore a scientific literate person can do the following:
• Describe, explain and predict natural phenomena.
• Identify scientific issues underlying decisions and express positions that are scientifically and technologically informed.
• Evaluate the quality of scientific information using sources and identified methods used to support a specific position or ideas.
• Form arguments based on evidence and apply conclusions based on the evidence. (Wikipedia)
In the past 10 years the standards used to describe, identify, evaluate and then form conclusions have been greatly diminished by scientific illiteracy. We are no longer encouraging scientific discovery and innovation. But have allowed our hatred, fear, and obsession of the oppressor to dominate our discussions and created an environment where intimidation is used as a way to maintain the status quo. Instead of using scientific problems solving methods, many of the leaders threaten physical harm to resolve conflicts. How we perceive the world around us is substantially influenced by our worldview, childhood, and environmental stressors, therefore it’s important that we adopt sound ideological practices. The human psyche is fragile and highly influenced by our experience. A person who is willing to die with a plan is not a warrior; he is a psychopath with nothing to lose. The only strategy against oppression is a strategy. One of my favorites quotes is “Appear weak when you are strong, and strong when you are weak”.
Voices of Fire
Photo Credit:Bavarian State Theater