“Kids are never the problem. They are born scientists. The problem is always the adults. They beat the curiosity out of kids. They outnumber kids. They vote. They wield resources. That's why my public focus is primarily adults.”
Neil deGrasse Tyson believes that children are inherently curious and have a natural inclination towards science. He emphasizes that it is the adults who often stifle this curiosity and discourage children from exploring the world around them. Tyson expresses his focus on educating and engaging with adults to inspire them to support and encourage the curiosity of children.
In this quote, Neil deGrasse Tyson highlights the natural curiosity and scientific inclination that children possess. He blames adults for stifling this curiosity and limiting children's potential. Tyson emphasizes the power dynamics between adults and children, pointing out that adults hold more influence and resources, which ultimately shape the educational and societal environment for children. Through his statement, Tyson calls for a shift in focus towards adults in order to foster a more supportive and nurturing environment for children to thrive as natural-born scientists.
In today's fast-paced world, it is more important than ever to nurture the innate curiosity and creativity that children possess. Renowned astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson emphasizes the role of adults in supporting and encouraging children's natural inclination towards exploration and discovery. This quote serves as a reminder that adults play a crucial role in shaping the future by fostering a love of learning and curiosity in the next generation.
Neil deGrasse Tyson's quote highlights the importance of nurturing curiosity and creativity in children. As adults, it's important to reflect on how we may unintentionally hinder children's natural inclination towards curiosity. Consider the following questions to reflect on your own influence on the children in your life:
“Some morning while your eating breakfast and you need something new to think about, though, you might want to ponder the fact that you see your kids across the table not as they are but as they once were, about three nanoseconds ago.”
“But you can’t be a scientist if you’re uncomfortable with ignorance, because scientists live at the boundary between what is known and unknown in the cosmos. This is very different from the way journalists portray us. So many articles begin, “Scientists now have to go back to the drawing board.” It’s as though we’re sitting in our offices, feet up on our desks—masters of the universe—and suddenly say, “Oops, somebody discovered something!” No. We’re always at the drawing board. If you’re not at the drawing board, you’re not making discoveries. You’re not a scientist; you’re something else. The public, on the other hand, seems to demand conclusive explanations as they leap without hesitation from statements of abject ignorance to statements of absolute certainty.”
“... there is no shame in not knowing. The problem arises when irrational thought and attendant behavior fill the vacuum left by ignorance.”
“Robots are important also. If I don my pure-scientist hat, I would say just send robots; I'll stay down here and get the data. But nobody's ever given a parade for a robot. Nobody's ever named a high school after a robot. So when I don my public-educator hat, I have to recognize the elements of exploration that excite people. It's not only the discoveries and the beautiful photos that come down from the heavens; it's the vicarious participation in discovery itself.”
“Whether or not you can never become great at something, you can always become better at it. Don't ever forget that! And don’t say “I’ll never be good”. You can become better! and one day you’ll wake up and you’ll find out how good you actually became.”
“The most accessible field in science, from the point of view of language, is astrophysics. What do you call spots on the sun? Sunspots. Regions of space you fall into and you don’t come out of? Black holes. Big red stars? Red giants. So I take my fellow scientists to task. He’ll use his word, and if I understand it, I’ll say, “Oh, does that mean da-da-da-de-da?”