What percentage of the population is scientifically literate?

[Anonymous]

I would guess maybe 8%. Definitely under 20%

-science teacher

[Anonymous]

^^Should be 99% ILLITERATE

[Anonymous]

I read that something like a quarter of nurses are antivax. Yikes.

[Anonymous]

I'm going to assume that real science literacy requires taking at least one college -level science course (you learn how about methodology and learn how to read the publications) so I think this is actually an answerable question. About 35 percent of Americans have a college degree, and some proportion get a BS vs a BA. I guess a quant person could look through this table and figure it out. I'm going to guess that like 2 in 5 are science/math related? 2/5 of 35, I think 14? So 14 percent of Americans are science literate?

https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d21/tables/dt21_322.10.asp

[Anonymous]

I don’t know about science literacy rates, I too think they’re probably <20%, but lots of people aren’t even critical thinkers, which is just as scary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ones who scream the loudest about #science! tend to be the most illiterate, in my experience. No one reads the actual studies. Social media has opened my eyes to so many friends and acquaintances who always seemed really smart, but really aren’t.

No I think it's the people calling for Fauci to be prosecuted, Nuremberg style, who are the most scientifically illiterate.

If we are to be honest, Fauci did lie/distort/obscure many things surrounding COVID, the origin of COVID, and the effectiveness of the vaccines and masking as well as handling children and COVID. He was not upfront about a great deal of things and that is what infuriates people.

I'm a firm believer in the effectiveness of the vaccine but even I can tell Fauci was less than honest and went out of his way to shut down scientific debates on the origin of COVID early and whether it was natural or created in the Wuhan lab. He was very much part of the politicization of COVID. He surely justified it in the name of greater public good, but at the same time there's no disputing he blatantly lied about a lot of things. And being deliberately vague and careful in certain word usage to imply something while making sure the word used doesn't guarantee it is no different from lying.

As OP is talking about scientifically literate, a good example would be understanding the difference between science and public health policy, which is not the same thing. Science is based on an objective quest for truth, and during COVID we saw way too much abuse in the name of science, effectively turning it into dogma rather than a quest for truth. Like the public health officials in the summer of 2020 who mandated social distancing, except for BLM protests.

I must admit I was always amused by the in this house we believe in science mantra. You don't believe in science. You believe in religion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Based on Covid discussions, I’d say about 10%.

Beat me to it!

[Anonymous]

The percentage that agrees with me!

[Anonymous]

We've seen that public health officials are not literate.

They are credentialed but poorly educated and very, very stupid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ones who scream the loudest about #science! tend to be the most illiterate, in my experience. No one reads the actual studies. Social media has opened my eyes to so many friends and acquaintances who always seemed really smart, but really aren’t.

No I think it's the people calling for Fauci to be prosecuted, Nuremberg style, who are the most scientifically illiterate.

If we are to be honest, Fauci did lie/distort/obscure many things surrounding COVID, the origin of COVID, and the effectiveness of the vaccines and masking as well as handling children and COVID. He was not upfront about a great deal of things and that is what infuriates people.

I'm a firm believer in the effectiveness of the vaccine but even I can tell Fauci was less than honest and went out of his way to shut down scientific debates on the origin of COVID early and whether it was natural or created in the Wuhan lab. He was very much part of the politicization of COVID. He surely justified it in the name of greater public good, but at the same time there's no disputing he blatantly lied about a lot of things. And being deliberately vague and careful in certain word usage to imply something while making sure the word used doesn't guarantee it is no different from lying.

As OP is talking about scientifically literate, a good example would be understanding the difference between science and public health policy, which is not the same thing. Science is based on an objective quest for truth, and during COVID we saw way too much abuse in the name of science, effectively turning it into dogma rather than a quest for truth. Like the public health officials in the summer of 2020 who mandated social distancing, except for BLM protests.

I must admit I was always amused by the in this house we believe in science mantra. You don't believe in science. You believe in religion.

Shut up, conservative. Adults are talking.

Good critical argument. Science!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ones who scream the loudest about #science! tend to be the most illiterate, in my experience. No one reads the actual studies. Social media has opened my eyes to so many friends and acquaintances who always seemed really smart, but really aren’t.

No I think it's the people calling for Fauci to be prosecuted, Nuremberg style, who are the most scientifically illiterate.

If we are to be honest, Fauci did lie/distort/obscure many things surrounding COVID, the origin of COVID, and the effectiveness of the vaccines and masking as well as handling children and COVID. He was not upfront about a great deal of things and that is what infuriates people.

I'm a firm believer in the effectiveness of the vaccine but even I can tell Fauci was less than honest and went out of his way to shut down scientific debates on the origin of COVID early and whether it was natural or created in the Wuhan lab. He was very much part of the politicization of COVID. He surely justified it in the name of greater public good, but at the same time there's no disputing he blatantly lied about a lot of things. And being deliberately vague and careful in certain word usage to imply something while making sure the word used doesn't guarantee it is no different from lying.

As OP is talking about scientifically literate, a good example would be understanding the difference between science and public health policy, which is not the same thing. Science is based on an objective quest for truth, and during COVID we saw way too much abuse in the name of science, effectively turning it into dogma rather than a quest for truth. Like the public health officials in the summer of 2020 who mandated social distancing, except for BLM protests.

I must admit I was always amused by the in this house we believe in science mantra. You don't believe in science. You believe in religion.

+1.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A very small percentage. I think people who don’t understand statistics (which is most people IME) or logic (also most people) are fundamentally incapable of understanding science.

Sadly I also think the majority of people don’t have any clue how much capitalism dictates scientific study. Not necessarily for any intentionally nefarious purposes, but scientists need to have their research funded, and journals like to have their publications subscribed to, and all of this means that what is being studied and what is being reported is heavily influenced by those (most likely scientifically ignorant) who control the purse strings.

^^This. I have a lot of education beyond college, and am very well versed in logic, but I do not understand statistics. Thus, I don't consider myself scientifically literate. I can and do read a lot of studies, but without having studied statistics and without having done research myself, my ability to consume it well is limited. I have a side gig at a med school, and we heavily encourage our students to take the opportunity to do some research while in medical school because if they haven't done it, they'll never be able to consume it well, and if they can't do that, it's hard to keep up to date on things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Any idea? I guess it depends on how scientific literacy is defined.

In DC???

DC is one of the dumbest urban areas in the USA.

As recently as 2009, the rate of adult illiteracy in D.C. was over 36%. That was more than 1/3rd of DC adults who could not even read, let alone understand science.

Gentrification pushed many of these folks out into PG. But there are still plenty of illiterates here.

Anyone know the current percentage?

[Anonymous]

Looks like 25%:

https://www.washlit.org/single-post/2020/05/04/Left-Behind-DCs-Literacy-Divide

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We've seen that public health officials are not literate.

They are credentialed but poorly educated and very, very stupid.

Maybe. As pointed out before, policy requires balancing costs and results. Governments don't have an endless supply of resources and money. I know that doesn't fit with the DCUM philosophy of zero risk.