Nerdist’s Newest StarTalker: Neil deGrasse Tyson
Speaking of space and science.

Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson is like the science teacher you wish you’d had
back in high school. With his radio show StarTalk,
he has cleverly utilized the celebrity interview format to enhance an
understanding of how science affects a famous life; starting today, the
new televised version will enhance yours on the Nerdist Channel. We had a
chance to talk to Dr. Tyson shortly after the show was announced; it
certainly improved our day.
Nerdist News: You were passionate about science from a very young
age, but was there always a passion for broadcasting and
communications, or the entertainment side of it?
Neil deGrasse Tyson:
No, not really. That sort of came later. I had no such ambitions, and I
still don’t, actually, [laughs] no matter what it otherwise looks like,
I still don’t. I do it because I can, not because I seek it out. And it
resonates with people. For what is a relatively small investment of my
energy, many people derive great fulfillment from it. That’s what an
educator wants, is to sit in front of an audience, and to have
information that you’re sharing. You want them to not only embrace what
you say, but like it, and perhaps feel compelled to share it with
others. That’s a good day for an educator. By the way, if people weren’t
learning, or if they weren’t enjoying it, I would just go home.
NN: The stereotypical science nerd isn’t known for being
extroverted or a great conversationalist. Have you always been this way,
or was it something you learned?
NDT:
[laughs] I had very extroverted parents. Growing up in that environment,
I didn’t know anything different. They were always entertaining, and
always had dinner parties. They were extroverted not in the “life of the
party” sense, but just in the energy they had to socialize. But because I went home to that every
day, the idea that people matter, and that having a social energy to
engage people is something natural, then it was not a foreign concept
for me to carry on that way. Only later, what I’d see is I’d be immersed
in communities of people where they either don’t value that investment
in social energy, or don’t care, or just have other things to do in
life.
NN: As a society, where do you think we stand as far as being “anti-science”?
NDT:
I think in the ’60s, the
people who were anti-science or anti-technology, they were still around,
but they were given no place to stand, because we were
on our way to the moon. What that meant, in terms of our progress and
science and engineering, it was manifest, hand-written large on a daily
headline. If you said, “I don’t believe in technology,” I’m like, “Go
take a hike! Look: we got Neil Armstrong walking on the moon! I’m not
even going to listen to you!” When you don’t have these big nationally
inspired and nationally-driven projects garnering headlines, then it’s
easy for people to take the fruits of science for granted, for them to
become complacent about what science is and engineering and what it
means to them. I would claim that if America went back to Mars, and took on all of
space as our backyard, and discoveries and patents and innovations were
rolling off, or were available to be tapped from the NASA flywheel of
innovation, then once again there’d be no place for those who are the
Luddites of society.
For more – much more! – with Dr. Tyson, including his experiences with politicized science and his possible resemblance to Sinbad in Necessary Roughness, check out our full interview. StarTalk on the Nerdist Channel starts today.