In the past, our methods and scientific institutions have tended to focus on the study of isolated natural processes, rather than on systems, analyzing more than synthesis and understanding nature more than predicting their behavior. And in many cases, science has focused on small short-term problems, often in monodisciplinary mode, and not on long-term, large-scale or integrated problems. While these approaches and perspectives have been a considerable knowledge base and have resulted in a broad portfolio of useful technologies, particularly in the 20th century, many of the problems facing humanity today can only be solved if we move closer to science in a more holistic way. More efforts are needed to understand integrated natural systems on multiple time and space scales. We also find that the conconnections of process/competence and interests/values of Americans [12] and this study, despite these studies with different analytical approaches, provide a fascinating basis for further research. Perhaps, for example, Americans in general – or people less known to science – merge the choice of methods (process) with competence, because they cannot imagine that several methods are competent: that is, there is only one way to study a particular scientific problem. Perhaps the German sample [13] did not show this confusion because the German education system as a whole or at a high level of education obtained by this sample was exposed to more or other information on this aspect of the scientific process. 1. Write about the cause and effects of a type of pollution In the general public, there is a degree of mistrust and even fear of science and technology (S-T). Some are based on public experience, but many things are the result of a large communication gap between scientists and society. Many reasons have been put forward to explain these attitudes: public ignorance or scientific misunderstanding, imprecise or biased media coverage, unequal distribution of the costs and benefits of science between different subgroups in society, lack of public control over the applications of S-T, and the inability of some scientists to communicate ideas in simple language. The issue of nuclear waste management is an example of how the gap between scientific knowledge (which, in this case, indicate that safe disposal technologies are at least as safe as other industrial risks accepted by society) and public opinion and public behaviour (persistent resistance to the use of these technologies) sometimes seems intractable, i.e. it is not easy to find a solution through better communication or further technical research.

“I strongly believe in the liberal art model of a vibrant university community that encourages active learning and personal interaction with students,” said Alexander. “I have discovered that the University of Siena provides an environment in which I can work closely with my students to help them explore the world of ideas, think critically about important topics, express and defend their positions in a clear and reasonable way, and creatively combine ideas.” Following in the footsteps of previous work [12, 13], we developed a scale of Reasons Scientific Discussions that was psychometrically stable, and that was discriminatory in five scientific contexts that were very different in familiarity and saltiness: the nature of dark matter in the universe; The risks and benefits of marijuana or nanotechnology The degree to which sea levels will rise by the end of the century; and the amount of dietary salt that needs to be reduced.