It occurs to me that many people seem to hold some animosity toward the physical sciences. Mention chemistry or physics to a group of college freshman and you are likely to cause post-traumatic stress syndrome in a fair number of them.

It is strange that this would be the case. After all, the electron, that friendly sub-atomic particle without which we would all fly apart at the speed of light, is essential to “Friends,” “Monday Night Football” and “Married With Children.” Why, without the electron we wouldn’t even have lights, much less television.

We tend to take the electron for granted. When we flick on a light switch to scrounge around for a term paper, few of us feel the same visceral excitement that Edison did when he turned on his first functional light bulb.

At Iowa State just two years ago, if you would have asked the average student about his Internet use you might have gotten a look of mixed revulsion and awe.

Today you might get the same reaction if you tell someone you have never used the Internet. Things change.

If we got excited about everything scientific, there wouldn’t be much time for anything else. So taking things for granted is necessary. But a little respect would be nice.

Electrons buzz around us almost continuously. In our modern society its hard to escape them. Our lights, televisions, microwaves and computers all come from years of scientific research, by people simply curious about the inner workings of the universe. Most of them never received much fame in their lifetime. But very few of us could go for a day without electrons.

How often do we think, as we sit back for “Monday Night Football” with a beer and a hoagie, that a fundamental force in the universe is allowing us to watch grown men pummel each other?

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think anyone needs to clutch their head and jump for joy every time they flip on a light. But people should be curious about science. I question modern apathy toward science.

During the Renaissance in Europe you were pretty much of a moron unless you could paint, sculpt, write epic tales (in Latin no less), philosophize, design pretty, if non-functional flying devices, seek harmonies in the movements of the stars (which you then applied to your 4-part organ fugues), and in your spare time blow a few things up with your chemistry set. People dug stuff like that. Today you’d be lucky to get a date. Things change.

Of course, back then there were few textbooks and memorization of mindless facts was not the way you learned things. The education system then was one of creative thinking. No one cared what you studied, as long as you were creative about it.

I blame today’s educational system for people’s declining interest in science. Everyone knows that memorization of mindless facts teaches nothing but mindless facts are soon forgotten.

If I were going to teach a course at ISU, I would need to write a creativity textbook. Teaching history and science with action-packed novels based on the life and times of such greats as swashbuckling Leonardo da Vinci, and superhero Michelangelo (Ninja Turtles notwithstanding). I would teach organic chemistry with oil paints and poetry and astronomy with telescopes and electric guitars.

It probably won’t happen, but things change.