David makes a sharp observation on my last post:
“it’s partly the realization that science doesn’t always give people what they crave. It’s an attempt to help people find hope and meaning in science. Most never will.”
Substitute religion for science in these sentences. There is a non-trivial percentage of people, me among them, who have a similar skepticism about religion. I recognize and accept that it works for others. But I find it empty for me.
That attitude is fine and I don’t have a problem with it. In my social circle I’d say it’s the norm. But I know few people who recognize that my sentence as written is also true. When it comes to science literacy, I think many people can’t seem to accept that people simply have different conceptions of the good life and human flourishing. That many find most of science boring and irrelevant. (Just to be clear: this is a general comment. I’m not saying this about David.) Until I see some evidence that rejecting evolution is actually harmful, I don’t see why we can’t embrace pluralism.