It's time to stop using "stepchild" as a pejorative term in science.

Despite their ubiquity, stepfamilies generally hold a stigmatized status. The scientific community at large has not been immune to the influence of stepfamily stigmatization. Misusing the term "stepchild" in science is unnecessary on several fronts. "Stepchild" is often intended to denote neglect, oversight, or mistreatment. Scholars should consider using more direct and precise language, especially considering that scientific writing benefits from clarity, parsimony, and precision. In any case, it's time to stop using "stepchild" as a pejorative term. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Why science education is more important than most scientists think.

The COVID-19 pandemic has revealed that a shockingly large fraction of the public is willing to ignore scientific judgements on issues such a vaccines and mask wearing. For far too many, scientific findings are viewed as what scientists believe, rather than as the product of an elaborate community process that produces reliable knowledge. This widespread misunderstanding should serve as a wake-up call for scientists, clearly demonstrating that the standard way that we teach science - as a large collection of "facts" that scientists have discovered about the world - needs major change. Three more ambitious and important goals for science education at all levels are outlined. In order of increasing difficulty, these are: (1) to provide all adults with an ability to investigate scientific problems as scientists do, using logic, experiment, and evidence; (2) to provide all adults with an understanding of how the scientific enterprise works - and why they should therefore trust the consensus judgements of science on issues like smoking, vaccination, and climate change; and (3) to provide all adults with the habit of solving their everyday problems as scientists do, using logic, experiment, and evidence. Although examples exist for attaining all of these goals, extensive education research will be needed to discover how best to teach the last two. I argue that such an effort is urgent, and that it can best begin by focusing on the introductory courses in biology and other science disciplines at the university level.

Metaphors as models: Towards a typology of metaphor in ancient science.

Metaphors play a crucial role in the understanding of science. Since antiquity, metaphors have been used in technical texts to describe structures unknown or unnamed; besides establishing a terminology of science, metaphors are also important for the expression of concepts. However, a concise terminology to classify metaphors in the language of science has not been established yet. But in the context of studying the history of a science and its concepts, a precise typology of metaphors can be helpful. Metaphors have a lot in common with models in science, as has been observed already. In this paper, therefore, I suggest a typology of metaphor in ancient science to fill this terminological gap by using concepts applied to the classification of models in science, as coined by Rom Harré. I propose to differentiate between homeoconceptual metaphors (with the same conceptual frame between source and target) and paraconceptual metaphors (mapped via a different conceptual frame). Furthermore, functional and structural aspects of metaphors in ancient science are taken into account. Case studies from ancient texts displaying metaphors in ancient science are presented and classified following the outlined typology of metaphors.

Polo Científico Productivo de Matanzas: mecanismo de integración de la ciencia y la producción / Productive Scientific Pole of Matanzas: mechanism for integrating science and production

RESUMEN La Unidad de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación de la Delegación Territorial del Ministerio de Ciencia, Tecnología y Medio Ambiente en Matanzas, promueve desde el 19 de enero de 2018 la revitalización del Polo Científico Productivo, como forma de procurar un mejor uso a la ciencia matancera e integrar los esfuerzos de los centros de investigación y empresas en pos del desarrollo socioeconómico del territorio. Actualmente, la provincia se encuentra envuelta en un esfuerzo por lograr que cada organismo se responsabilice con la puesta en marcha del Polo Científico Productivo, con la Delegación Territorial del Ministerio de Ciencia, Tecnología y Medio Ambiente como entidad coordinadora. El presente trabajo valora la significación del Polo Científico Productivo en la elevación del impacto de la ciencia y la técnica en la solución de los problemas productivos del territorio matancero (AU).

ABSTRACT The Unit of Science, Technology and Innovation of the Territorial Delegation of the Ministry of Science, Technology and Environment in Matanzas promotes, since January 19 2018, the revival of the Productive Scientific Pole as a form of giving a better use to science done in Matanzas province and integrating the research centers and enterprises efforts in pursuit of the socioeconomic development of the territory. Currently, the province is involved in an effort for ensuring that every organization assumes its responsibility in setting in motion the Productive Scientific Pole with the delegation of the Ministry of Sciences, Technology and Environment as the coordinating entity. This paper is written with the aim of assessing the importance of the Productive Scientific Pole in increasing the impact of science and technique in solving the productive problems of the Matanzas territory. The current paper assesses the importance of the Productive Scientific Pole in increasing the impact of science and technique in solving the productive problems of the Matanzas territory (AU).

Beyond politics: additional factors underlying skepticism of a COVID-19 vaccine.

Even before it had been developed there had already been skepticism among the general public concerning a vaccine for COVID-19. What are the factors that drive this skepticism? While much has been said about how political differences are at play, in this article I draw attention to two additional factors that have not received as much attention: witnessing the fallibility of the scientific process play out in real time, and a perceived breakdown of the distinction between experts and non-experts.