Science, What if is and is Not
The primordial relationships between science and the practical matters associated with human existence appear on the veree of heine reestablished bv nublic and/or nolitical deman; The ear& separation of science and technolow in terms of nhilosonhv . . and strateeies for solvine- .perceived problems was certainly heneficial to science, as indicated by the enormous advances made in the scientific disciplines. The face that science, with its stress on disciplined objeltivity, was conducted by a community mostly separated from those interested in the utility of knowledge allowed scientists to resist the temptations of vested interests, to which all humans are subject.-compare, for example, two situations involving pH measurements: in one the object is to establish the ionization constant of a weak organic acid and in the other the results will be used in a water pollution judgment. In the first case there can be no advantage to biasing the readings, whereas in the other a variety of pressures-all understandable from a human point of view-can he imagined to lead to partiality in either direction. Althoueh historicallv the ~ a t h of s science and technoloev ran he traced more or iess i;dependently, many have rerngnized the importance of the scientific disciplines as a wellspring of ideas and facts for the h r t t e r m a ~ tof the human condition. T o the educnted person in 18th century England, it was obvious that science eould he useful in industry, and some historians believe that the industrial revolution was partially dependent upon the scientific developments of that time. Some were well regarded scientists who could slip out of the discinlined obiectivitv of science into the practical matters associated wkb thei; discoveries. Others, who were the usefulness of not trained as scientists. could appreciate .. scientific inquiry without dictating the directions such inouiries should take for the "eood of humanitv." Good earlv examples of this point of view occur in 'Conversations & Chemistry" published anonvmouslv bv Jane Marcet in the early 19thcehtury. "~onvers&ons,"&attem~t to dramatize the great discoveries in chemistry for children, is an informal dialog between Mrs. Bryan, a teacher, and Emily and Caroline, her pupils. In the 8th London edition of "Conversations," Mrs. Bryan referred to the work of Sir Humphrey Davy leading to the preparation of potassium and sodium, to which Caroline replies: But I have heard that these discoveries, however splendid and extraordinary, are not very likely to prove any great benefit to the world, as they are rather ohjeets of curiosity than of use. Mrs. Brvan admonishes: Such may he t h e illilwal wncluims of the iynurant and narrow minded; hut rhoseuhocanduly e5timatethead\antageoienlarging thewhere d s r ~ e n rmust r Iw cunbincrd that thr acquisition of rwr). new fact, however unconnected it may first appear with practical utility, must ultimately prove beneficial to mankind. Some scientists have attempted to protect the bastion which has yielded an enormous output of ideas and attendant facts. A good example is the position taken by Roger Guillemin, recipient of the 1977 Nobel Prize for his studies on brain hormones. He said, "Science deals with the acquiring of new knowledge. The use, including misuse or ill use, of that knowledge is the realm of politicians, engineers, and technologists." While this may be a correct observation, it oh-
viously is either not generally accepted by the public or the differences in Guillemin's statement are too subtle to be appreciated by the public. The current insistence on merging science and technology may reflect the public's requirement for meeting material needs. After all, the combination of science and technology led to a relatively improved lifestyle over the years, even though some may demur from agreement in an absolute sense. The erowine com~lexitiesof modern life " have suggested to some that science and technology must become more intimately intertwined; many feel that all science is useful, as indeed it may be-ultimately. The danger is that we may reach the of believing that usefulness can be divined a priori and therefore, to be efficient, and conservative of human resources, only "useful" science should be supported. In this view, usefulness is in the eye of the beholder, and if the beholder also holds the purse strings, progress in science may be stifled by unimaginative persons. Research nro~osedto uncover new knowledee cannot be defended o~its;sefulness if the detailed character of the new knowledee is unknown. A very. large .. number of historical examplese.xist on this point. Imagine placing Volta or Galvani in the position of defendinc their work on the hasis of usefulnes'. At the time, what possible relationship could twitching frog legs and moistened pieces of paper sandwiched between pieces of metal have to humanly useful situations. Yet, the recognition of, and the eventual ability to manipulate, electrical phenomena are one of the pillars of modern life. From a layman's point of view no one in his right mind should have supported or encouraged the work of either Volta or Galvani. Althoueh there mav be economic and/or volitical pressures to force scientists tobromise useful results, the temptation to acceed must he resisted. Knowledge for its own sake is an honorable and necessary pursuit. ltproduces the facts and ideas upon which technology lives, and in a human sense is ultimately useful. We only need to be convinced-as if it were an article of faith-that without the wellspring of science, nroeress due to technolow "" slows to an unacceptable level. Those who prefer to work within the framework of disciplined obiectivitv are doomed to live in a state of perpetual tension with technolow. No amount of rationalizationbased upon economics, efficiency, and/or usefulness should sway them from their pursuits, the results of which will be ultimately useful-if they are sensitive to human needs or are lucky. Their fortunes may wax or wane depending upon the vageries of what is perceived to be useful, hut they must resist the temptation to abandon their disciplined objectivity. Likewise, science must be supported for the public good even though its immediate usefulness may not be apparent. In a time of short funds, decisions concerning what particular prujecrs to support shn~lld118iwured on producrit.e people. We need the faith to helieve there are (ur will be) productive technologically oriented people, just as there have been in the past. It is, in the words of Bragg, "the nature of things." As teachers we have the obligation to attempt to help our students understand the relationships between science and technology so they might know the basis for important decisions that will be made in their lifetimes, whether they become citizens, technologists or scientists. JJL
- .
.
~
~~
~
~
~
~
-
~
~
~
Volume 57, Number 8. August 1980 / 529
