Skip to main content
Social Sci LibreTexts

1.3: Science and Belief- Just Because We Can, Doesn't Always Mean We Should

  1. Last updated
  2. Save as PDF
  • Page ID
    138509

    • Keith Chan
    \( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \) \( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)\(\newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\) \( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\) \( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \(\newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\) \( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\) \( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)\(\newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

    Science and Belief: Just Because We Can, Doesn’t Always Mean We Should.

    Format: In-person or online (discussion or lab activity)

    Icon Description automatically generated
    Image Caption: International Symbol for Deafness and Hearing Loss

    Author: Anne E. Pfister, PhD

    Time needed: 45-75 minutes

    Learning Objectives

    • Distinguish between science and belief
    • Apply anthropological theories and methods to understanding real-world issue

    Supplies Needed

    • Short readings (provided)
    • Worksheet (provided)
    • Space for discussion (if in-person)
    • Discussion board (if online)

    Readings

    Introduction

    Chapter two author, Jonathan Marks (2017) presents anthropology as the “science of mediation”. This lesson and activity invite Marks’s style of intellectual dialogue, encouraging us to find nuanced connections between some seemingly contradictory concepts. In this lesson, we contemplate two different relational concepts fundamental to the anthropological study of human beings as a species.

    Students read two articles that approach deafness from different perspectives and analyze the role of culture and biology with regard to human conditions and diversity as well as the role of science and belief in bio-medical intervention (and other scientific pursuits).

    Steps

    • Introduce (or review) the properties of science and the properties of belief systems. Remind students that both science and belief systems are valid ways of exploring and evaluating phenomena; they are systems we use to understand the world around us. Belief systems take many forms (ethics, morals, philosophy, religion and laws, for example) and science comes from a specific historical context which then spread on a global scale.
    • Distribute the worksheet and the readings listed above. Give students approximately 20-30 minutes to read both articles/summaries (they are reading for big ideas, not doing close readings).
    • Discuss students’ reactions to the articles.
    • Ask students what big ideas are in tension. How can these dyadic concepts be “mediated” through anthropological approaches?
    • Dyadic concepts to discuss might include: Culture and biology; science and belief; nature and nurture; ontology and epistemology.

    Takeaway Ideas and Points for Review:

    All humans use science AND belief systems to explore the world in our attempt to understand it. Sometimes we have the science to ameliorate problems, but our belief system (ethics, morals, laws) dictate whether (and how) we put science into action (or not!). Think about cloning, for example. We have advanced science capable of cloning our pets (see Brogan, 2008 article in the For Further Exploration below). Does that mean we should? What about cloning your little brother?

    Therein lies the irony of the presentation of these two articles together. Gene therapy works only for people with genetically inherited deafness (i.e. folks that are born into deaf families). People are born deaf or deafened for many reasons (genetic causes account for about half of childhood cases, according to the CDC). More importantly, many deaf people, like the couple in one of the articles, do not view deafness as a disability and many people who approach deafness from a deaf cultural perspective do not view deafness as a loss but often as gain (see Bauman et. al., 2014 article in the For Further Exploration below). In fact, some ethnographic research suggests that deaf families (i.e. families with deaf relatives) are the least likely to seek medical intervention (like gene therapy) because they prioritize the shared cultural and linguistic experience in deaf communities and through the use of sign language (see readings in the For Further Exploration section below for examples and discussion).

    • Important: Pointing out this irony does not suggest that either approach is wrong. Again, anthropological theories and methods help us embrace that which is apparently contradictory and “mediate” common ground for more holistic understandings of complex issues like deafness.
    • A nuanced approach to deafness –one that acknowledges the connections between culture/biology and science/belief – might better focus resources and programs for deaf people and their families.
    • Other dyadic concepts to consider: nature & nurture; ontology & epistemology; organic & synthetic; individual & group; extraordinary & mundane

    Adapting for Online Learning

    If this is an in-person lab, rank how adaptable to online learning it would be(mark in bold):

    1 Not adaptable 2 Possible to adapt 3 Easy to adapt

    For Further Exploration

    Bauman, Dirksen and Murray, Joseph. 2014. An Introduction to Deaf Gain. Psychology Today.

    Brogan, Jason. 2008. The Real Reason You Shouldn’t Clone Your Dog. Smithsonian Magazine.

    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2020. Hearing Loss in Children, National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities.

    Cooper, Rachel. 2007. Can it be a Good Thing to be Deaf? The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy. 32(6):563-583.

    Kusters, Annelies. 2015. Deaf Space in Adamorobe: An Ethnographic Study in a Village in Ghana. Gallaudet University Press.

    Mullin, Emily. 2020. The End of Deafness: Gene Therapy Could End Deafness. Should it? Future Human.

    Pfister, Anne E. 2017. Forbidden Signs: Language Socialization and Therapeutic Approaches to Language in Mexico. Ethos. 45(1):139-161.

    Image Attributions

    International Symbol for Deafness and Hearing Loss by the State of Rhode Island is in the public domain.

    References

    Marks, Jonathan. 2017. The Alternative Introduction to Biological Anthropology, 2nd Edition. Oxford University Press.

    Nelson, Katie, Lara Braff, Beth Shook, and Kelsie Aguilera. 2019. “Chapter 1: Introduction to Biological Anthropology” In Explorations: An Open Invitation to Biological Anthropology, edited by Beth Shook, Katie Nelson, Kelsie Aguilera, and Lara Braff. Arlington, VA: American Anthropological Association. http://explorations.americananthro.org/

    Science and Belief Worksheet

    Embracing Anthropology as a “science of mediation”

    Jonathan Marks (2017) presents anthropology as the “science of mediation”. This lesson and activity pursue intellectual dialogue, encouraging us to find nuanced connections between some seemingly-contradictory concepts that inform our understanding of what it means to be human.

    In this lesson, we contemplate two different relational concepts fundamental to the anthropological study of human beings as a species.

    Step 1

    Using the chart below, jot down some adjectives that describe the characteristics of science and belief (you may also use associated words, or those that can be used interchangeably).

    SCIENCE BELIEF

    Step 2

    Now, do the same for biology and culture. Jot down some adjectives that describe the characteristics of each.

    BIOLOGY CULTURE

    Step 3

    Now, read the two short articles. Don’t get bogged down by too many details. Instead, read so you understand the general idea behind the two very different approaches to deafness. Then, review the discussion questions below and prepare your thoughts for the discussion. You may wish to jot down your thoughts ahead of the discussion.

    Questions for Discussion:

    1. Prior to reading these articles, did you think about deafness as being primarily biological or cultural?
    1. Do either or both articles consider deafness from a predominantly biological approach?
    1. Do either or both articles approach deafness from more of a cultural understanding?
    1. What are the roles of science and belief in each of the articles?
    1. Did reading these articles and discussing them change any of your ideas about science/belief and culture/biology? About approaches to deafness?
    1. How can anthropological methods and theories help inform our understandings of deafness and other conditions/statuses/phenomena?
    1. What other seemingly-contradictory concepts do these articles underscore?
    1. Do you perceive any irony in the contrast between these two articles?
    Note

    Review the Take-away Ideas Conclusions document once instructed to do so.

    Take-away Ideas and Conclusions:

    • All humans use science AND belief systems to explore the world and attempt to understand it. Sometimes we have the science to ameliorate problems, but our belief system (ethics, morals, laws) dictate whether (and how) we put science into action (or not!). Think about cloning, for example. We have advanced science capable of cloning our pets (see article below). Does that mean we should? What about cloning your little brother?
    • Therein lies the irony of the presentation of these two articles together. Gene therapy works only for people with genetically inherited deafness (i.e. folks that are born into deaf families). People are born deaf or deafened for many reasons (genetic causes account for about half of childhood cases, according to the CDC). More importantly, many deaf people, like the couple in one of the articles, do not view deafness as a disability and many people who approach deafness from a deaf cultural perspective do not view deafness as a loss but often as gain (see article below). In fact, some ethnographic research suggests that deaf families (i.e. families with deaf relatives) are the least likely to seek medical intervention (like gene therapy) because they seek the shared cultural and linguistic experience in deaf communities and through the use of sign language (see articles below).
      • Important: Pointing out this irony does not suggest that either approach is wrong. Anthropological theories and methods help us embrace that which is apparently contradictory and “mediate” common ground for more holistic understandings of complex issues like deafness.
      • A nuanced approach to deafness –one that acknowledges the connections between culture/biology and science/belief – might better focus resources and programs for deaf people and their families.
    • Other dyadic concepts to consider: nature & nurture; ontology & epistemology; organic & synthetic; individual & group; extraordinary & mundane

    References

    Marks, Jonathan. 2017. The Alternative Introduction to Biological Anthropology, 2nd Edition. Oxford University Press.

    Further Reading:

    This page titled 1.3: Science and Belief- Just Because We Can, Doesn't Always Mean We Should is shared under a CC BY-NC 4.0 license and was authored, remixed, and/or curated by Keith Chan via source content that was edited to the style and standards of the LibreTexts platform; a detailed edit history is available upon request.