Download Understing the word Scientific Literacy by the example of Immune

Scientific Literacy
I think the term scientific literacy refers to having the scientific knowledge. As it
is noted by Emily Martin in the article “Scientific literacy, What is it, Why it’s important
and Why Scientist Think We Don’t Have It: The case of immunology and the Immune
system”, in science matters: “science literacy is defined as ‘the knowledge you need to
understand public issue…to put of [scientific] advances into a context that will allow you
to take part in the national debate about them” (340). I think this definition of scientific
literacy is too narrow because just to take part in debate and pass it is not scientific
knowledge. If we take story number one as an example for this definition, it will make
more sense to understand the definition of scientific literacy. It proves that this definition
is too narrow because everybody has knowledge that immune system helps to fight
against disease. I think this information is enough for ordinary public. The scientist from
scientific matters is trying to prove the scientific literacy by giving us the result of the
pop quiz that was held on the general scientific knowledge of ordinary people. There is a
controversy in the answer of the public and scientists. We can not say that anybody is
wrong. That means we cannot say that we are illiterate.
I think the immune system is a complex collection of organs, cells and a tissue,
which prevents that pathogenic organism, enter in our body. In the story one, there is a
professor in microbiology. He is trying to explain the immune system in common
language. As professor Keller explains immune system as a powerful system in our body
and metaphor for real power that is in our body (342). That means that without Immune
system, it is not easy to live as he compares the immune system with the real power in the
body. There are many chances to get infection. Without immune system, the body can
not fight against the infection.
In Professor Keller’s class, there are two very different views from two different
students. For Mike, to understand immune system is very hard and troublesome. It is not
necessary to understand immune system for him. Here, Professor Keller’s class doesn’t
prove enough to make important of immune system for Mike. However, for the other
student Elizabeth, from the same class, the immune system is amazing different
interconnected world in our body. As she explains us that, “Everything’s all
connected…Inside me is like whole other universe…I have like micro cells within me
and then I’ll go up to the bones and organs put together, and just after that, and then
comes myself…”(344). For her to understand immune system is important and
interesting. She explains to us that it is empowerment for her. She is student of
Professor Keller too. But for her after Professor Keller’s class, it is really amazing and
powerful system of the body.
I think the understanding of Elizabeth about the immune system is somehow
related to my definition. Her understanding about the immune system is the other way to
understand immune system as a different world in our body. In this story, the metaphor
that is used for immune system is a different world. I think this definition is easily
understandable.
We can not describe this kind of situation as a scientific illiteracy. By looking at
all examples, in which one student have really interesting knowledge about immune
system. However, the other student doesn’t. That doesn’t mean that everybody does not
have scientific knowledge. Even though, Mike doesn’t have any interest to understand
the immune system, he has knowledge that immune system fights against diseases. So, it
can not be scientific illiteracy.
By looking at all the arguments and examples, it can be concluded that we have
lack of scientific knowledge. But, we do have scientific knowledge. This idea is
supported by looking at the examples of story about professor’s class in which one
student has really interesting ideas about immune system. So, I am disagreeing with
author because according to me this definition is too narrow.