Selection versus influence

This is a topic considered frequently in the history of modern science course STS 3301.

2009-11-11

When I was a high school student, faced with issues concerning the opening of Seabrook nuclear power plant, our school being within the emergency management zone, I supported peaceful nuclear power. I also was fascinated by the proposed Superconducting Super Collider. I think I thought "That sounds cool, plausible, let's do it!"

When I went to college, I made friends with people who were against nuclear power, or who came out against it as we learned more about it in our undergraduate and graduate experience. I learned to question the values of nuclear power also. It can't simply be said that I did it to stay on par with my friends, because there were plenty of things that they did that I chose not to do. I was conscious of my own freedom of choice as I often sat in rooms as the only person not smoking pot or not drinking.

So, was I influenced to do things, or did I select among possible choices and resources, or is there some third way of seeing my history? I propose we focus on the phrase "to be a part of something." The phrase sounds wishy-washy because it doesn't have an action verb. But avoiding this view is one of the main problems in science education.

Traditionally in science education, we try to influence our students through training to "think scientifically," to identify "correct scientific work." (Insert reference to Elements of Physics by Alpheus W. Smith, preface, here.) Then, we occasionally allow students to choose their path. What we almost never do (exceptions include undergraduate research projects) is to expect students to be a part of the scientific endeavor. Instead, we traditionally expect them to be part of an audience, then jump in at certain high levels.

2009-11-16

Professor Seth asked us last Tuesday whether there was any saving the historian-identifying-influence method, and, after watching Heisenberg's story and thinking about my opinions on free will (there is none) and determinism (it is limited), what is available and proper to the historian is the identification of influences, a measure of their strengths, as long as it is tempered with it's opponent, an identification of an agent selecting resources, not just buffeted by them.