Contents
American scientists are seriously concerned about the growing gap between the progress of science and the backwardness of the public consciousness, vegetating in the captivity of ignorance and prejudice. Research in recent years has revealed a link between the rejection of certain scientific theories by adults and the psychology of young children. In particular, children’s «disordered teleology» — the tendency to attribute to every object a purpose for which it was made by someone — is one of the reasons for the amazing persistence of creationism.
The modern scientific picture of the world is too complex for the mass consciousness. Not a single scientist can fit in his individual head all the knowledge obtained by science over the past two or three centuries, to say nothing of mere mortals. But this is not the only reason for the spread of prejudices, superstitions and pseudoscientific ideas in modern society. An equally important reason is the inconsistency of many of the conclusions of modern science with the innate properties and inclinations of the human psyche and the established stereotypes of social consciousness.
In a review article published in the latest issue of the journal Science (Paul Bloom, Deena Skolnick Weisberg. Childhood Origins of Adult Resistance to Science // Science. 2007. V. 316. P. 996–997.), members of the Yale University Department of Psychology (Department of Psychology, Yale University) Paul Bloom (Paul Bloom) and Deena Skolnick Weisberg talk about research into this phenomenon, called » resistance to science” (resistance to science).
According to recent polls, 42% of American adults believe that humans and animals have existed in their current form since the beginning of time. Among the minority who recognize evolution and natural selection, only a very small part is able to clearly explain what it is (usually people believe that evolution is some mysterious law of nature, due to which children are better adapted to the environment than their parents). «Resistance to science» does not only affect evolution: a huge number of people believe in scientifically unverified «medical» practices, in ghosts, in astrology, etc.
It would seem, well, let them believe in themselves — if only they were healthy. In the end, thanks to scientific progress, most of the population in developed countries has every opportunity to live in clover, not knowing or understanding anything at all. But no, because there is also the political side of the issue. In a modern democratic society, it is these ignorant masses that ultimately determine state policy in such “knowledge-intensive” areas as climate change, genetically modified organisms, stem cells, cloning, vaccination, etc.
Research in recent years has shown that certain aspects of «resistance to science» seem to be common to all peoples and cultures and stem from two basic features of the child’s psyche. The first is related to what children know “initially”, the second is related to how they learn new knowledge.
1. Science contradicts the “original” ideas of children about the structure of the world
Even a one-year-old baby is by no means a «blank slate», he has in his own way a very deep understanding of the physical world and human relations. Toddlers are well aware that material objects have density, stability over time (they continue to exist, even if they are not visible), that without support they fall, etc. They also understand that the actions of the people around them are meaningful and purposeful, that their emotions reflect attitude to different situations. These initial ideas serve as a necessary basis for further learning, but they also sometimes make it difficult to perceive scientific ideas.
For example, a child’s conviction that objects fall without support makes it difficult to believe in the sphericity of the Earth (after all, then all people who are «on the other side» would fall down). This scientific concept is fully accepted by the child, usually only at the age of 8-9 years, and before that, systematic distortions are introduced into it. For example, a child may believe that the Earth is spherical, but at the same time believe that people live only on the “upper” hemisphere, but do not live below, fall down.
Some children’s prejudices turn out to be so ineradicable that even school education cannot overcome them. For example, many American college students believe that a ball that has rolled out of a curve t.i.u. will continue to move along a curved path (option B in the figure is chosen).
As for the mass rejection of the theory of evolution (and other achievements of biology), the reasons for this lie in another feature of the child’s psyche — namely, in the tendency inherent in young children to see in everything that surrounds them, the result of someone’s purposeful activity. This is called «disordered teleology» (promiscuous teleology).
There is no need to be surprised, because the human brain initially developed precisely as a device for solving practical problems, for setting goals and inventing ways to achieve a goal. The most pressing tasks for higher primates, including humans, have always been associated with social relations, for example, with the struggle for position in the social hierarchy. To solve these problems, one needs the ability to understand the motives of the actions of one’s fellow tribesmen, an ability that was originally built on reflection, on judging others “by oneself”. What is surprising in the fact that such an understanding extends to the whole surrounding world, that a child or a savage, hearing thunder, will inevitably think that this sound was produced by someone with some very specific purpose.
For example, a special study showed a strong conviction of four-year-old children that everything in the world exists «for something» (lions — to look at them in the zoo, clouds — to make it rain). Special studies have also confirmed the propensity of children to a creationist explanation of the origin of objects in the world (everything around is made by someone for some purpose).
The attractiveness of such ideas does not weaken with age. Poets echo children: “If the stars are lit, it means that someone needs it.”
These intuitions prevent people from accepting the idea of evolution, just as the original naive ideas about physical laws prevent them from grasping the idea that the Earth is spherical.
Another intuition common to children is dualism, or the idea of a fundamental difference between the material and the spiritual, such as between body and soul, brain and consciousness. American preschoolers know that the brain is needed for certain mental functions, primarily conscious ones, such as solving math problems. But these same preschoolers refuse to believe that brains are needed for things like hide-and-seek or loving your brother. When they were asked what would happen if the boy’s brain was transplanted into a piglet, preschoolers answered that it would turn out to be a very smart piglet, but all his desires and knowledge would remain pigletlike.
The inclination towards a dualistic worldview hinders the perception of the achievements of modern neurobiology, which convincingly show that everything “spiritual” in a person is entirely determined by completely material processes occurring in the brain. The contradiction between the original dualism of the human worldview and modern scientific views gives rise to bizarre social problems. For example, debates around the permissibility of experiments on animals, human embryos, and stem cells often boil down to the question of whether these objects have a «soul». Moreover, the use of magnetic resonance imaging to study the brain of criminals has led to the emergence of new, highly original trends in the legal profession. Statements have appeared that if a person’s antisocial actions are determined by the work of his brain, then, therefore, the person is not to blame for anything, just “his brain made him do it.” Thus, not only children, but also quite adult lawyers flatly refuse to accept scientific data about the nature of the brain and psyche.
2. Science, you say? Something is unbelievable
Much of the «resistance to science» is determined by the innate properties of the human psyche, but something also depends on the cultural environment. This is evidenced, in particular, by interethnic differences in the degree of resistance to certain scientific ideas. For example, the rejection of the idea of evolution among Americans is much stronger than in most other developed countries.
In different countries, different sets of «truths» are considered «well-known» and not requiring proof. Such ideas are usually assimilated by children without any critical analysis. Typical examples are the meaning of common words, «belief» in microbes and electricity. The existence of microbes, for example, in developed countries, is not questioned by anyone — and children, too, without hesitation, are imbued with a sincere belief in the existence of these invisible creatures. Microbes, fortunately, do not contradict any «innate intuitions», but on the contrary, they help to explain diseases, rotten products, etc., in a completely teleological way.
However, most of the knowledge is still not accepted without evidence by either children or adults. When it comes to scientific knowledge, even adults — and let’s not even talk about children — can hardly check anything themselves due to incompetence. In this case (that is, almost always), we replace the direct assessment of the reliability of knowledge with an assessment of its source. If the source seems trustworthy and if it itself feels confident, we take the new knowledge on faith, even if we do not really understand what it is about. A typical example is the aforementioned Americans who believe in natural selection but fail to explain what it is.
This applies not only to science. In one recent study, people were asked to rate various political agendas that were told that they came from a particular political party (Republican or Democrat). The subjects gave the programs seemingly quite meaningful, reasoned assessments. However, statistical analysis showed that in reality the ratings were determined not by the content of the program and not by the attitude of this person to any specific laws or government actions, but only by “party affiliation”. For example, supporters of the Democrats also supported completely «undemocratic» projects if they were told that the project came from their favorite party.
It turned out that children, just like adults (and even more so), tend to evaluate the reliability of information by the «weight» and «solidity» of its source. Already four or five-year-old children know perfectly well that adults know more than their peers. If an adult and a child say the opposite, the children believe the adult. They already know that among adults there are specialists of various profiles and that a doctor understands diseases better, and a mechanic better understands broken bicycles. In addition, children are much more willing to believe that «source of knowledge» that demonstrates complete confidence in themselves and their words. Myamli-scientists with their eternal doubts and phrases like «of course, while this is just an assumption …» do not inspire any confidence in children.
In this regard, we must pay tribute to the far-sightedness of Russian science fighters, who dream in textbooks of biology after each chapter to add a footnote that «there is, however, another point of view …», and in addition to introduce the study of the religious picture of the world in schools. Of course, a biology teacher, entangled in «footnotes», will not be able to puff out her cheeks in class like a teacher of an «alternative subject». Which of them the children will believe is beyond doubt.
The researchers conclude that «resistance to science» arises from contradictions between the intuitions of young children and what they are taught; “resistance” passes from childhood into adulthood if the relevant scientific ideas do not have universal support in society, and becomes especially strong if there is a non-scientific alternative to these ideas that does not contradict “elementary common sense” and is based on solid, respected and very confident in own «sources». In the United States, this is exactly the case with evolutionary biology and neuroscience: the conclusions of these sciences contradict both children’s intuition and the statements of many respectable politicians and religious figures.
What can we say about the situation in Russia. The only consolation is that the creationists, Fomenkovites and other astrologers, of course, are not to blame for anything. It’s just «their brain makes them think that way.»