<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~d/styles/rss2full.xsl" type="text/xsl" media="screen"?><?xml-stylesheet href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~d/styles/itemcontent.css" type="text/css" media="screen"?><rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:feedburner="http://rssnamespace.org/feedburner/ext/1.0" version="2.0">
<channel>
	<title>Comments for It's the Thought that Counts</title>
	
	<link>http://www.thoughtcounts.net</link>
	<description>critical analysis and interesting ideas</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 13:41:35 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="self" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/thoughtcounts/comments" type="application/rss+xml" /><item>
		<title>Comment on Silly meme time by Daphne</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/thoughtcounts/comments/~3/445482767/</link>
		<dc:creator>Daphne</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2008 01:32:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thoughtcounts.net/?p=234#comment-855</guid>
		<description>Yikes!  Days behind but done.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yikes!  Days behind but done.</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/thoughtcounts/comments/~4/445482767" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://www.thoughtcounts.net/2008/11/silly-meme-time/#comment-855</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Silly meme time by Progressive Conservative</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/thoughtcounts/comments/~3/443326511/</link>
		<dc:creator>Progressive Conservative</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2008 15:18:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thoughtcounts.net/?p=234#comment-845</guid>
		<description>I tried to mostly tag other blogs that I normally leave in peace. I was feeling a little mischeivious that day. 

Thanks for playing along.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I tried to mostly tag other blogs that I normally leave in peace. I was feeling a little mischeivious that day. </p>
<p>Thanks for playing along.</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/thoughtcounts/comments/~4/443326511" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://www.thoughtcounts.net/2008/11/silly-meme-time/#comment-845</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Skeptical blogging brainstorm #3 by Podblack - Kylie Sturgess</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/thoughtcounts/comments/~3/441351494/</link>
		<dc:creator>Podblack - Kylie Sturgess</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Nov 2008 03:29:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thoughtcounts.net/?p=160#comment-824</guid>
		<description>I'm currently involved in a project, which was taken from my first article for Australian Skeptic:
Strategies for Skepticism - Skeptical Activism, et al (http://podblack.com/?p=326).

I hope to be able to link people to the larger, extended copy, soon!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m currently involved in a project, which was taken from my first article for Australian Skeptic:<br />
Strategies for Skepticism - Skeptical Activism, et al (http://podblack.com/?p=326).</p>
<p>I hope to be able to link people to the larger, extended copy, soon!</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/thoughtcounts/comments/~4/441351494" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://www.thoughtcounts.net/2008/10/skeptical-blogging-brainstorm-3/#comment-824</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Silly meme time by Ian</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/thoughtcounts/comments/~3/440622978/</link>
		<dc:creator>Ian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 Nov 2008 23:28:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thoughtcounts.net/?p=234#comment-822</guid>
		<description>In case you don't notice the trackback above: &lt;a href="http://terahertzatheist.ca/2008/11/02/tagged/" rel="nofollow"&gt;Here's my obedience.&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In case you don&#8217;t notice the trackback above: <a href="http://terahertzatheist.ca/2008/11/02/tagged/" rel="nofollow">Here&#8217;s my obedience.</a></p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/thoughtcounts/comments/~4/440622978" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://www.thoughtcounts.net/2008/11/silly-meme-time/#comment-822</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Silly meme time by Tagged! | Terahertz</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/thoughtcounts/comments/~3/440256087/</link>
		<dc:creator>Tagged! | Terahertz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 Nov 2008 16:01:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thoughtcounts.net/?p=234#comment-819</guid>
		<description>[...] first blog-meme hit. Here’s the [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] first blog-meme hit. Here&#8217;s the [...]</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/thoughtcounts/comments/~4/440256087" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://www.thoughtcounts.net/2008/11/silly-meme-time/#comment-819</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Dancing about architecture by Z</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/thoughtcounts/comments/~3/438750542/</link>
		<dc:creator>Z</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2008 20:27:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thoughtcounts.net/?p=184#comment-803</guid>
		<description>It gets &lt;em&gt;some&lt;/em&gt; knowledge out there, to be sure. It's better than nothing. I do think we could make huge &lt;em&gt;improvements&lt;/em&gt; in that by explicitly acknowledging that there is more to research than what gets shown in the cheesy documentaries.

I'm not so concerned with exactly how much special relativity people understand. The "dumbed down version" is fine. I don't think we should try to teach everyone linear algebra in order to make sure they really get it. My point is that we shouldn't pretend there isn't any linear algebra and make it seem like a cartoon animation is the sum total of a century of scientific progress on the topic. Learning isn't just about the concepts and facts. It's also about understanding what a career in the sciences is like, and why we should trust and value the results obtained by scientific experiments.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It gets <em>some</em> knowledge out there, to be sure. It&#8217;s better than nothing. I do think we could make huge <em>improvements</em> in that by explicitly acknowledging that there is more to research than what gets shown in the cheesy documentaries.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m not so concerned with exactly how much special relativity people understand. The &#8220;dumbed down version&#8221; is fine. I don&#8217;t think we should try to teach everyone linear algebra in order to make sure they really get it. My point is that we shouldn&#8217;t pretend there isn&#8217;t any linear algebra and make it seem like a cartoon animation is the sum total of a century of scientific progress on the topic. Learning isn&#8217;t just about the concepts and facts. It&#8217;s also about understanding what a career in the sciences is like, and why we should trust and value the results obtained by scientific experiments.</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/thoughtcounts/comments/~4/438750542" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://www.thoughtcounts.net/2008/10/dancing-about-architecture/#comment-803</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Dancing about architecture by Progressive Conservative</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/thoughtcounts/comments/~3/438185442/</link>
		<dc:creator>Progressive Conservative</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2008 13:39:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thoughtcounts.net/?p=184#comment-801</guid>
		<description>But don't you think 'dumbing down' still gets the knowledge out there? I always think of the example of just an average guy jumping in a time machine and going back a couple hundred years. Being able to describe, at least in basic terms, combustion engines, airplanes, penicillin, the internet, etc. 

Even in the process of 'dumbing down' science we still have citizens with vastly more basic knowledge than someone living a couple centuries ago.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>But don&#8217;t you think &#8216;dumbing down&#8217; still gets the knowledge out there? I always think of the example of just an average guy jumping in a time machine and going back a couple hundred years. Being able to describe, at least in basic terms, combustion engines, airplanes, penicillin, the internet, etc. </p>
<p>Even in the process of &#8216;dumbing down&#8217; science we still have citizens with vastly more basic knowledge than someone living a couple centuries ago.</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/thoughtcounts/comments/~4/438185442" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://www.thoughtcounts.net/2008/10/dancing-about-architecture/#comment-801</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Dancing about architecture by Z</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/thoughtcounts/comments/~3/437047255/</link>
		<dc:creator>Z</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Oct 2008 15:33:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thoughtcounts.net/?p=184#comment-794</guid>
		<description>Okay, I accept your point that archaeology is not all that full of math. You yourself call it a social science. You could have also used the example of political science, or of sociology. Scientific thinking is involved, but math doesn't have to be. That's fine. It's also not really what I was talking about. I wasn't trying to argue that there's no aspect of science that isn't math-intensive, or that there's no point whatsoever to popular science without math or other concrete details — just that in the difficult balance between accessibility and content in popular science writing, I think people err too often on the side of accessibility and sacrifice some very valuable content. It might not be so bad for society if there was a wider understanding that science does involve some hard thinking. (Maybe people would be less likely to swallow all that pseudoscience that makes no greater attempt at being scientific than using the word "quantum" repeatedly.)

Also, "dumbing down" can bring in funding from some places (if they're happy to see outreach) but can cut you off from funding from other places (if you dumb down too convincingly and make your work seem easy, or if you get so simplified that you spread misconceptions rather than understanding).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Okay, I accept your point that archaeology is not all that full of math. You yourself call it a social science. You could have also used the example of political science, or of sociology. Scientific thinking is involved, but math doesn&#8217;t have to be. That&#8217;s fine. It&#8217;s also not really what I was talking about. I wasn&#8217;t trying to argue that there&#8217;s no aspect of science that isn&#8217;t math-intensive, or that there&#8217;s no point whatsoever to popular science without math or other concrete details &mdash; just that in the difficult balance between accessibility and content in popular science writing, I think people err too often on the side of accessibility and sacrifice some very valuable content. It might not be so bad for society if there was a wider understanding that science does involve some hard thinking. (Maybe people would be less likely to swallow all that pseudoscience that makes no greater attempt at being scientific than using the word &#8220;quantum&#8221; repeatedly.)</p>
<p>Also, &#8220;dumbing down&#8221; can bring in funding from some places (if they&#8217;re happy to see outreach) but can cut you off from funding from other places (if you dumb down too convincingly and make your work seem easy, or if you get so simplified that you spread misconceptions rather than understanding).</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/thoughtcounts/comments/~4/437047255" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://www.thoughtcounts.net/2008/10/dancing-about-architecture/#comment-794</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Dancing about architecture by Progressive Conservative</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/thoughtcounts/comments/~3/436952375/</link>
		<dc:creator>Progressive Conservative</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Oct 2008 13:43:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thoughtcounts.net/?p=184#comment-793</guid>
		<description>From Z: &lt;i&gt;...since it implies you can understand science while being bad at math.&lt;/i&gt;

I consider the scientific method as the foundation of science, not math. And as such I know a lot of 'scientists' who rely heavily on the scientific method and who are, in fact, lousy at math. As an archaeologist I was surrounded by social scientists who applied the scientifc method every day in the field, in the lab and in the classroom. But the use of math was limited to making sure an excavation unit was 1 meter by 1 meter. And that we accurately measured the width of a layer of stratigraphy. 

Also, my company was heavily involved with 'public archaeology' i.e. bringing our profession to the public in the form of public digs where we 'dumbed down'the rhetoric and actually let them participate. But that also sparks interest and they can pursue more knowledge on their own. It also brings in funding, which is equally important. I don't see a problem with that.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>From Z: <i>&#8230;since it implies you can understand science while being bad at math.</i></p>
<p>I consider the scientific method as the foundation of science, not math. And as such I know a lot of &#8217;scientists&#8217; who rely heavily on the scientific method and who are, in fact, lousy at math. As an archaeologist I was surrounded by social scientists who applied the scientifc method every day in the field, in the lab and in the classroom. But the use of math was limited to making sure an excavation unit was 1 meter by 1 meter. And that we accurately measured the width of a layer of stratigraphy. </p>
<p>Also, my company was heavily involved with &#8216;public archaeology&#8217; i.e. bringing our profession to the public in the form of public digs where we &#8216;dumbed down&#8217;the rhetoric and actually let them participate. But that also sparks interest and they can pursue more knowledge on their own. It also brings in funding, which is equally important. I don&#8217;t see a problem with that.</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/thoughtcounts/comments/~4/436952375" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://www.thoughtcounts.net/2008/10/dancing-about-architecture/#comment-793</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Who can be my president? by Progressive Conservative</title>
		<link>http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/thoughtcounts/comments/~3/435626235/</link>
		<dc:creator>Progressive Conservative</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Oct 2008 19:47:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thoughtcounts.net/?p=194#comment-784</guid>
		<description>A,

I've lived in 'middle America' my whole life, but I've also traveled quite a bit, especially on the East Coast. My wife's family is from New England, I've attended week-long conferences in Providence, we vacation in NH, etc. All told I've spent probably 30 weeks on the East Coast. Add to that plenty of other time spent in places like Chicago, Seattle, etc. Maybe I'm not an expert on geographic differences in cultural attitudes, but I do feel like I've seen some pretty good anecdotal moments. 

Not once in 33 years have I heard someone here make a negative generalization about people living in big cities on the East Coast. But in my travels beyond my state I can name at least 10 instances where I heard negative remarks about small towns, middle America or the South. On my honeymoon I was on a ferry over to Martha's Vineyard, two days after Bush defeated Kerry, and I heard a woman ask, "How can the rest of the country be so stupid?" When the owner of the inn we stayed at there saw a GOP patch on my backpack she said I was brave for having that around there. People don't worry about those things where I live. 

So my point is, maybe there is some truth to what Palin says. I think there are very different attitudes towards things like guns, religion, education in places like Boston than there are in places like Louisville or St. Louis or Tulsa. It's not wrong to point out that Obama has a different set of values than many of us in the middle of this country. Is it populism? Yes. But so is a lot of what Obama says. 

Some scholars today believe that the 'working class' is defined more by their education level and their profession than by their actual income. Accepting that premise, then when people like John Edwards talk about 'two Americas' he's actually positioning a lot of non-college graduates against those more educated. So the anti-intellectual label for Palin is a bit hypocritical in that light. 

I also have to reject your notion that Palin's comments somehow make it more difficult for atheists. I think you're giving her words waaaaay more power than they deserve.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A,</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve lived in &#8216;middle America&#8217; my whole life, but I&#8217;ve also traveled quite a bit, especially on the East Coast. My wife&#8217;s family is from New England, I&#8217;ve attended week-long conferences in Providence, we vacation in NH, etc. All told I&#8217;ve spent probably 30 weeks on the East Coast. Add to that plenty of other time spent in places like Chicago, Seattle, etc. Maybe I&#8217;m not an expert on geographic differences in cultural attitudes, but I do feel like I&#8217;ve seen some pretty good anecdotal moments. </p>
<p>Not once in 33 years have I heard someone here make a negative generalization about people living in big cities on the East Coast. But in my travels beyond my state I can name at least 10 instances where I heard negative remarks about small towns, middle America or the South. On my honeymoon I was on a ferry over to Martha&#8217;s Vineyard, two days after Bush defeated Kerry, and I heard a woman ask, &#8220;How can the rest of the country be so stupid?&#8221; When the owner of the inn we stayed at there saw a GOP patch on my backpack she said I was brave for having that around there. People don&#8217;t worry about those things where I live. </p>
<p>So my point is, maybe there is some truth to what Palin says. I think there are very different attitudes towards things like guns, religion, education in places like Boston than there are in places like Louisville or St. Louis or Tulsa. It&#8217;s not wrong to point out that Obama has a different set of values than many of us in the middle of this country. Is it populism? Yes. But so is a lot of what Obama says. </p>
<p>Some scholars today believe that the &#8216;working class&#8217; is defined more by their education level and their profession than by their actual income. Accepting that premise, then when people like John Edwards talk about &#8216;two Americas&#8217; he&#8217;s actually positioning a lot of non-college graduates against those more educated. So the anti-intellectual label for Palin is a bit hypocritical in that light. </p>
<p>I also have to reject your notion that Palin&#8217;s comments somehow make it more difficult for atheists. I think you&#8217;re giving her words waaaaay more power than they deserve.</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/thoughtcounts/comments/~4/435626235" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://www.thoughtcounts.net/2008/10/who-can-be-my-president/#comment-784</feedburner:origLink></item>
</channel>
</rss>
