Natural Science 301 Guidelines

This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.

As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

On the relation between scientific literacy and political orientation

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • On the relation between scientific literacy and political orientation

    This paper is most interesting.

    From the abstract:
    Who believes that astrology is scientific and who believes that it is not scientific at all? This paper uses representative samples of the adult general public to challenge two of the most common assumptions of political psychology: (1) that a belief in astrology is such a good indicator of conservatism that it is appropriate to use as a measure of conservatism itself; and (2) that Republicans and conservatives tend to hold views opposing science. Data from the 2006, 2008, 2010, and 2012 General Social Surveys are analyzed and demographic correlates of a belief in astrology are reported by age, gender, education, occupation, industry, and region of the country, as well as by political party and conservative-liberal orientation. Also reported are which political groups know that the Earth revolves around the Sun.
    Some relevant findings:

    The conclusion:
    The results presented in this paper for astrology are similar to those for knowing that the Earth revolves around the Sun, but not the same as for some other scientific beliefs, such as a belief in evolution.The relationship between science and politics is much more complex than the one-sided approach reported by most social scientists and journalists.
    Last edited by Paprika; 02-18-2014, 12:03 AM.

  • #2

    Self published by James Lindgren from Northwestern University - School of Law on a website called "Social Sciences Research Network".

    All science so far!


    • #3
      Originally posted by HMS_Beagle View Post
      "Social Sciences Research Network".
      Which is a collection of preprints, like arXiv. I don't claim it conclusive or verified, just interesting.


      • #4
        The Democratic party is generally going to be pretty skewed anti-scientific by the fact that it's a coalition of the double-digit IQs that put a higher value on self-esteem than patriarchal book-lurning from Patriarchal Dead White Guys. And most scientists are middle-to-highbrow but not really that independent-minded when the threat or suggestion of cutting off funding comes up.


        • #5
          Originally posted by Paprika View Post
          This paper is most interesting.
          Lindgren set up a very elaborate strawman to burn. Of the three scales he mentions (the Adorno F-scale, the Wilson-Patterson Conservatism Scale, and the RWA scale), all are extremely problematic, the first two are widely rejected, and the third does not even mention astrology.

          I should also mention that I think the scales Lindgren is trying to refute are, in and of themselves, ridiculous.


          Related Threads


          Topics Statistics Last Post
          Started by shunyadragon, 09-20-2023, 09:55 PM
          0 responses
          Last Post shunyadragon  
          Started by rogue06, 09-13-2023, 10:08 AM
          25 responses
          Last Post rogue06
          by rogue06
          Started by shunyadragon, 09-03-2023, 08:08 AM
          1 response
          Last Post rogue06
          by rogue06
          Started by rogue06, 09-01-2023, 11:38 AM
          4 responses
          Last Post shunyadragon