R
reznwerks
Guest
"You have to give up something to be a scientist. It may be painful, but it has to go.
What is it? It's a freedom. --- You mean scientists have to give up freedom? They're less free than other people?---
Exactly. That may be a hard truth, but then that's the subject of this essay.
Children are free to believe almost anything they want. We think it's cute and charming when a little kid believes in the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy, Santa Claus. Most parents are amused, and tolerate such childish beliefs. Many encourage them, and even use them. How many parents have used the threat of Santa Claus's not coming to promote better behavior? We don't think of such deceptions as "lying" to our children. It's more like taking harmless advantage of their immaturity and childish gullibility. Sometimes it's explaining things, when the child isn't ready for the complicated truths of the real world.
An active imagination is vital for a growing child. As a matter of fact, I read recently that a complete lack of imagination in children is a symptom of autism -- a serious mental disorder (remember The Rain Man ?). Very young children have trouble distinguishing imagination from reality. They may have imaginary playmates -- or imaginary monsters. Sometimes their imaginations are as real, to them, as reality.
But as a child grows, he learns the difference, usually without too much trouble. A high school student, for instance, no longer believes he can grow up to be Batman, or fears a monster under his bed. If he does, we consider him "disturbed." That doesn't mean that an adolescent or adult has to give up imagination. On the contrary, we know that our most gifted, intelligent, productive people have very active imaginations. That may be what distinguishes them from more "ordinary" people. But they know the difference. They don't confuse imagination with reality.
Scientists have imaginations. I think they surely have to. Otherwise, how could they imagine possible experiments, or possible answers to be tested? How could they imagine general laws, or great unifying theories to explain isolated facts? How could they even conceive of things they will never really "see" -- like electrons, or black holes?
Then where's the freedom scientists have to give up? Little kids are free to believe anything they want to believe -- anything they can imagine. They can believe something because it's fun to believe it. They can change their minds if it's no longer fun, or if something more fun comes along. A little girl can believe in the Easter Bunny when she's two, and that her doll can understand her at three. Kids give up these childish beliefs -- or realize that they're just imagination -- as they get older. In some cases they may not, however, give up the habit of believing in something just because they want to -- because it's fun to believe it, because it would be cool if it were true, because the world would be more interesting if it were true, maybe they would have more control over the world if it were true. Thus we have teenagers, and plenty of adults, who are ready to believe in things that would be neat, that would give them power, if they were true: astrology, rabbits' feet, ESP, Bigfoot and UFOs, magic in various forms, guardian angels, luck. Even scary things fit in (ghosts, poltergeists, demon possession), because they're fun: we like to be scared -- and maybe we can blame some of our failings on the "powers beyond."
Such beliefs are very human, They're surely comforting, but they're not science . Science, if it means anything, has to mean believing only what can be tested, demonstrated repeatedly, proven physically -- and believing everything that can be so proven, even if you'd prefer it not to be true, even if it's uncomfortable. This definition has to include no t accepting things that don't stand up to such rigorous tests, or at least suspending belief in them until such proof is supplied. I'm not talking about abstract religious beliefs here; science is neutral in such areas. But when real effects are claimed in the physical world (Madam Zorba can predict your future; I can cure you by touching you; the world is only 6,000 years old), science has to demand hard, replicable evidence that stands up to the closest examination. That's science .
Only that attitude is science. Anything else is alchemy, astrology, wizardry, magic, superstition. Science gave up on those attitudes because they didn't work. Scientists are not free to believe in things just because they want them to be true, or to disbelieve uncomfortable truths just because they don't like them. If science and scientists hold a scientifically established belief (the existence of the atom, say, or the evolution of life), then an individual is free to believe or disbelieve it as he pleases -- but a scientist, or anyone who considers himself "scientific," is not. He cannot hold a contrary belief unless he has hard , incontrovertible, massive evidence that he is right. If he has that, science will soon agree with him.
There's a price to everything. This is one of the prices of being a scientist ."
R. J. Riggins
darrwin@aol.com
What is it? It's a freedom. --- You mean scientists have to give up freedom? They're less free than other people?---
Exactly. That may be a hard truth, but then that's the subject of this essay.
Children are free to believe almost anything they want. We think it's cute and charming when a little kid believes in the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy, Santa Claus. Most parents are amused, and tolerate such childish beliefs. Many encourage them, and even use them. How many parents have used the threat of Santa Claus's not coming to promote better behavior? We don't think of such deceptions as "lying" to our children. It's more like taking harmless advantage of their immaturity and childish gullibility. Sometimes it's explaining things, when the child isn't ready for the complicated truths of the real world.
An active imagination is vital for a growing child. As a matter of fact, I read recently that a complete lack of imagination in children is a symptom of autism -- a serious mental disorder (remember The Rain Man ?). Very young children have trouble distinguishing imagination from reality. They may have imaginary playmates -- or imaginary monsters. Sometimes their imaginations are as real, to them, as reality.
But as a child grows, he learns the difference, usually without too much trouble. A high school student, for instance, no longer believes he can grow up to be Batman, or fears a monster under his bed. If he does, we consider him "disturbed." That doesn't mean that an adolescent or adult has to give up imagination. On the contrary, we know that our most gifted, intelligent, productive people have very active imaginations. That may be what distinguishes them from more "ordinary" people. But they know the difference. They don't confuse imagination with reality.
Scientists have imaginations. I think they surely have to. Otherwise, how could they imagine possible experiments, or possible answers to be tested? How could they imagine general laws, or great unifying theories to explain isolated facts? How could they even conceive of things they will never really "see" -- like electrons, or black holes?
Then where's the freedom scientists have to give up? Little kids are free to believe anything they want to believe -- anything they can imagine. They can believe something because it's fun to believe it. They can change their minds if it's no longer fun, or if something more fun comes along. A little girl can believe in the Easter Bunny when she's two, and that her doll can understand her at three. Kids give up these childish beliefs -- or realize that they're just imagination -- as they get older. In some cases they may not, however, give up the habit of believing in something just because they want to -- because it's fun to believe it, because it would be cool if it were true, because the world would be more interesting if it were true, maybe they would have more control over the world if it were true. Thus we have teenagers, and plenty of adults, who are ready to believe in things that would be neat, that would give them power, if they were true: astrology, rabbits' feet, ESP, Bigfoot and UFOs, magic in various forms, guardian angels, luck. Even scary things fit in (ghosts, poltergeists, demon possession), because they're fun: we like to be scared -- and maybe we can blame some of our failings on the "powers beyond."
Such beliefs are very human, They're surely comforting, but they're not science . Science, if it means anything, has to mean believing only what can be tested, demonstrated repeatedly, proven physically -- and believing everything that can be so proven, even if you'd prefer it not to be true, even if it's uncomfortable. This definition has to include no t accepting things that don't stand up to such rigorous tests, or at least suspending belief in them until such proof is supplied. I'm not talking about abstract religious beliefs here; science is neutral in such areas. But when real effects are claimed in the physical world (Madam Zorba can predict your future; I can cure you by touching you; the world is only 6,000 years old), science has to demand hard, replicable evidence that stands up to the closest examination. That's science .
Only that attitude is science. Anything else is alchemy, astrology, wizardry, magic, superstition. Science gave up on those attitudes because they didn't work. Scientists are not free to believe in things just because they want them to be true, or to disbelieve uncomfortable truths just because they don't like them. If science and scientists hold a scientifically established belief (the existence of the atom, say, or the evolution of life), then an individual is free to believe or disbelieve it as he pleases -- but a scientist, or anyone who considers himself "scientific," is not. He cannot hold a contrary belief unless he has hard , incontrovertible, massive evidence that he is right. If he has that, science will soon agree with him.
There's a price to everything. This is one of the prices of being a scientist ."
R. J. Riggins
darrwin@aol.com