The Wednesday Evening Lecture
One Hundred and Eighty Years of Education in Popular Science at the Royal Institution Sir George Porter, F.R.S. The Royal Institution, London, England
Abstract The popularization of science is not always popularespecially among scientists. The scientist is often in the vanguard of those deploring the ignorance of politicians and other non-scientists, yet scientists are largely to blame for this unhappy state of affairs. They often regard popularization as vulgarization and any form of simplification as unworthy of their own detailed study of some particular branch of knowledge. This was not so in the earlv nineteenth centurv when the I3oynl ln3tirurim t'illrd it.. theatrr, in the lashionablecenter of \l.~vinir,with thc ;ociet\ 111111 i ~ ~ r r l l w uft l.ondon. llump h r e y ' ~ a 6and his student, Michael Faraday, enthralled audiences, old and young alike, with their brilliant expositions and experimental demonstrations of contemporary science while carrying out their own brilliant research. Their successors, particularly the Braggs, continued the traditions which continue to the present day. Today's scientific educators can learn much from the story of these men and their institution.
Selected Paragraphs At this conference on chemical education we might ask "Why chemical education?" Why do we wish t o lead people into understanding of chemistry? The quick answer is "to produce professional chemists who will give us a better living through chemistry". Most of us here would add that we also
want to produce professional chemists to do research of fundamental kind so as t o increase our knowledge and understanding of the world and of ourselves, regardless of its practical usefulness. If this were the whole answer most chemistrv teachers should he givensome education in chemistry. Butwhy? Again, there is the quick professional answer: only in this way can we and our pupils learn whether they have the ability and the interest to become urofessional chemists. But, apain, most of selves, should be an essential part of the general education of all young people. This is one sense of the term "popular science," science for all the people, not just the professionals. There are two aims of popular education in science, one useful and the other enjoyable. The useful aim is to assist the democratic process. The world is not governed hy scientists and I would not like to predict the consequences if i t were. I think chemists would do a
Volume 59
,
Number 2
February 1982
97
better job than "political scientists" but then, who wouldn't? We have only one vote and beyond this our main duty, as scientists, is to see that those voting understand enough science to make rational choices. We must also ensure that those for whom thev vote understand enough science to deal intelligentlv with tlt:ic.nie, rducariun, cnersy, industry, the envirmment, health. and all u ~ hi1n.a; t ~ wherv thr deci:'31(1113 to he made are so often scientific ones. The second purpose of popular science is the enjoyable one. The sciences, like the arts, are part of our cultural heritage. They subsume our whole knowledge of the natural world in which we live, and they should he enjoyed. This is not so much a matter of education, hut of inspiration for the young and entertainment for the old. But can science really be enjoyed
98
Journal of Chemical Education
as part of the good life, in the same way as the arts? The scientist and the artist have much in common; both strive for originality through imagination; each tries to make a new statement and each hopes that the statement will be in some way acceptable to others. The fundamental difference between them is in the type of statement which is made. The scientist's statement must be made in a form which can he tested by any man who is prepared to learn the necessary skills, and i t is a statement about things which are common to all men. It is, in John Ziman's words, public knowledge. The artist's statement is always partly about himself. The artist does not say "this is how i t is," but "this is how I see it." He makes a statement which can never be tested and can never he proved right or wrong.
