It's great to see a lot of comments with an awareness that many in today's society aren't verifying (or able to verify?) the science they come across.

Yet I'm not seeing much talk yet of theories and frameworks that take this reality as a starting point. That takes this widespread scientific non-competence as a starting point to then chart a path forward to a competent society.

In other words, what are some strategies to support and guide people into becoming competent? How do we prevent this non-competence from showing up in the next generations?

As someone who has a shoddy base when it comes to science, I am still often missing the societal acknowledgement that 1.) it is hard to find patient, compassionate teachers and suitable material if you didn't do well early on (e.g. my sister did, I didn't), and 2.) that acknowledge the reality of both a.) having to untangle existing miseducation (shoddy, neglected base), while b.) giving enough time and space for the right scientific theories to fall into place (i.e. for competence or 'mastery' to start occurring). In other words: many of you here agree that people aren't able to derive or verify their own scientific explorations, yet what are the best learning frameworks for these adults to re-base their scientific/critical thinking skills?

As I said before, I currently have quite a shoddy base (to my great sorrow), how and where do i start remedying this? How do I rebuild my base, starting from where I am at now? Who has done this before? Who has achieved this? What was their path like?

Personally I currently believe the big intellectual 'gap' between the intellectually competent and less-than competent is a combination of 1.) artificial scarcity of learning material and opportunities caused by the profit-motive in academia/sciences, together with the criminalization of cooperation due to intellectual property laws (the propertied class enclosing and monopolizing knowledge) [1], and 2.) the knock on effect this causes on the non-propertied class (those who do not own the black box (intellectual) property they create, and who receive wages to work on this property for a firm), as they are forced to focus on their own skillset and position [2], over fostering widespread peer learning (e.g. passing on their knowledge) and the shared building and emergence of a rich network/web of collective intelligence [3]. Added on top of this brew are the psychological effects on society of a small group of people who believe they are innately intellectually superior (because they have been told throughout their lives that they are, and they have been put on a pedestal: 'rewarded' [4]), while living and working in today's black box society. That small group does not believe it is possible to get a 'second chance' at building a scientific base because they unconsciously believe that the current economic system (the bourgeois property system and it's profit motive) hands out work to the 'right' people, every time. [4] Essentially they have come to completely attach their identity and self-worth to their professional and technical strengths/skills. [5]

In my experience there is unfortunately no talking with most of these people. Until they personally witness the miraculous intellectual growth of another human being who emerged from a place different than they have, or in an area they didn't expect, their ego will protect them. This ego-protection is is not necessarily a bad thing in our current dog-eat-dog world, yet it does mean that a new groundbreaking compassionate learning framework is less than likely to emerge from their circles.

So to summarize, and to spell out what the above reality means for me: to today's society I am 'not worth spending time nurturing' because I am seen as a 'very late bloomer' (worst framing: I am a lost cause because I was lazy and I supposedly didn't 'get with the program' early enough [6]). In many areas I do not yet have the competences to actively contribute to a specific scientific or technological endeavor, yet also very few places to turn to to properly, sustainably and affordably 'skill up'. Both the 1.) curse of knowledge [7] and 2.) the lack of time and patience experienced by existing many knowledge workers, due to the stress and they experience, means that finding allies for growth is made nearly impossible. To conclude, and to emphasize my aforementioned arguments: the underlying challenge seems to me to be how we remove the profit motive from science and from technological research and development.

"The profit motive, in conjunction with competition among capitalists, is responsible for an instability in the accumulation and utilization of capital which leads to increasingly severe depressions. Unlimited competition leads to a huge waste of labor, and to that crippling of the social consciousness of individuals which I mentioned before.

This crippling of individuals I consider the worst evil of capitalism. Our whole educational system suffers from this evil. An exaggerated competitive attitude is inculcated into the student, who is trained to worship acquisitive success as a preparation for his future career.

I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals. In such an economy, the means of production are owned by society itself and are utilized in a planned fashion. A planned economy, which adjusts production to the needs of the community, would distribute the work to be done among all those able to work and would guarantee a livelihood to every man, woman, and child. The education of the individual, in addition to promoting his own innate abilities, would attempt to develop in him a sense of responsibility for his fellow men in place of the glorification of power and success in our present society."

— Albert Einstein, Why Socialism? [8]

So anyway, what beautiful frameworks do what I described above (and earlier) [9]? What will help me become scientifically competent? Who has gone there before (from my starting point); who should I talk to?

-

[1] Marianna Mazzucato, https://web.archive.org/web/20160204223931/https://nybooks.c...

[2] Wendy Liu, Gatekeeping in the tech industry: https://dellsystem.me/posts/fragments-50

[3] Aaron Swartz, Guerilla Open Access Manifesto: https://archive.org/stream/GuerillaOpenAccessManifesto/Goamj...

[4] Alfie Kohn, Punished by Rewards: The Trouble with Gold Stars, Incentive Plans, A's, Praise and Other Bribes: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/541132.Punished_by_Rewar...

[5] Discussion on 'The Role of Jargon in Left Politics?': https://www.reddit.com/r/CriticalTheory/comments/l49hci/the_...

[6] Devon Price, Laziness Does Not Exist - But unseen barriers do: https://archive.is/s4Dn0 / https://humanparts.medium.com/laziness-does-not-exist-3af27e...

[7] Wikipedia, Curse of knowledge: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_knowledge

[8] Albert Einstein, Why Socialism?: https://monthlyreview.org/2009/05/01/why-socialism/

[9] Me on a new distributed rhizomatic education system: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25753856