Who am I?
Christian. Skeptic. Ponderer. Sold on Western Civilization. Background in engineering and software. Rational, but not rationalist.
I'm a Hugh-inspired, long-tail blogger.
I Value
Informs my values.
News
Blog Search
Posts On This Page:
Archives
- October 2004
- November 2004
- December 2004
- January 2005
- February 2005
- March 2005
- April 2005
- May 2005
- June 2005
- July 2005
- August 2005
- September 2005
- October 2005
- November 2005
- December 2005
- January 2006
- February 2006
- March 2006
- April 2006
- May 2006
- June 2006
- July 2006
- August 2006
- September 2006
- October 2006
- November 2006
- December 2006
- January 2007
- February 2007
- March 2007
- April 2007
- May 2007
- June 2007
- July 2007
- August 2007
- September 2007
- October 2007
- November 2007
- January 2008
- February 2008
- March 2008
- April 2008
- July 2008
- August 2008
- September 2008
- October 2008
- November 2008
- December 2008
- February 2009
- June 2009
- July 2009
- October 2009
- December 2009
- January 2010
- February 2010
- April 2010
- May 2010
- July 2010
- February 2011
- April 2011
- May 2011
- February 2013
Look closer. Think harder. Choose the sound argument over the clever one.
Sunday, August 19, 2007
Movies dumbing down (but not just science)
From Ars Technica:
[Though] the US educational system does not do a good job of producing scientifically-literate adults, ... the media isn't a force for clarity in the sciences either. Two physicists from the University of Central Florida are now saying the combination of the two makes everything that much worse. They claim that as Hollywood mixes realistic special effects with the physically absurd, they're leaving a scientifically-illiterate public completely bewildered about what's actually possible here in the real world.
I agree, though movies' stretches of physics bother me least. As the author mentions:
Let's face it: most movies require a certain suspension of disbelief. But we're constantly bombarded by discussions of movie plotlines stretching that ability past its breaking point. I can't say I've ever seen an equivalent discussion of how ignoring the basic properties of reality can do the same.
Pointing out how something in a movie could never happen in real life is an awkward thing. It makes one come across a little, um, what? Geeky? Maybe. Of course we're suspending disbelief. It's just fiction, after all.
But I think the authors are onto something, too. I think lots of people uncritically internalize too much of what they see in movies--every kind of fiction--to their own detriment.