Scientific Temper and Education: a Framework for Discussion
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
COMMENTARY Scientific temper and education: a framework for discussion Natarajan Panchapakesan Scientific temper is the use of scientific methods in areas other than natural science, like sociologi- cal and ethical issues. Acquiring scientific temper is a change in human behaviour and hence not a part of natural science. It gets strengthened not by studying basic natural sciences, but by applying scientific methods to human behaviour. The curriculum of all students (including scientists) needs to include social science and humanities for strengthening their scientific temper. I have often wondered why a scientist in It is because scientific temper is a psy- that may exist even in my absence. It is India is most reluctant to talk or write chological attitude which is not influ- the world of physics and other natural something about general matters, espe- enced by doing routine science, but sciences. Emotion or feeling does not en- cially in the newspaper or media. So I requires change in one’s values and ter into the impersonal description of the was very happy to see the critical com- moral/ethical frameworks. In India, this outside world. Logic and scientific ments of Siddharthan1 (IMSc, Chennai) is still largely decided by family and so- method (repeatability, falsifiability) are about the article of Sarukkai2 (a philoso- ciety. This has been noted by many per- necessary. This world has a universal pher at NIAS, Bengaluru) on the ‘March sons, both scientists and non-scientists. time and history. It is accessible to every for Science’ held on 9 August 2017. I Most of them agree that values and wis- individual through his or her perceptions. was wondering whether I should inter- dom are outside natural science. Ethical Science is related to the outer world and vene in the debate as I had disagreements framework decides largely our attitudes decides our knowledge of it, as well as with both of them. However, I was reluc- and behaviours. Still Siddharthan has a its laws and evolution. Here the word tant to write. point. The sheer scale of the change in ‘science’ refers to natural science; social There were more responses3 from Sa- life and environment, due to science and science belongs to the inner world. rukkai and Pathak (a sociologist from technology, in the last 60 years has re- JNU, Delhi). Again I hesitated to re- duced the sanctity of superstitions. Peo- spond. Then Surendran4 (a sociologist ple do not worry about travelling south Human attitudes and social science from TISS Mumbai), criticized both of on Thursdays, as much now as earlier. I them in a detailed way for their skepti- do not know about bathing with clothes The distinction between natural and so- cism of and bias against science. She on after an eclipse as some newspaper cial science is important. As the philoso- claimed that sociology is also a science recommended recently. pher John R. Searle7 (UC Berkley, USA) and some sociologists had also marched To continue the discussion, it may be puts it ‘The distinction, rough as it is, be- with the scientists. Then came a sociolo- useful to look at the science/non-science tween the so called “natural” sciences gist of science, Thomas5 (Jesus & Mary divide from a broader perspective – the and the “social” sciences is based on a College, Delhi) who criticized Surendran world view of an individual. World view more fundamental distinction in ontology saying that her functional approach to is a collection of memory, knowledge, (essence of things), between those fea- sociology is not correct. Thomas claimed attitudes, values, vision and so forth; and tures of the world that exist independ- further that social scientists need not fol- is what guides and determines a person’s ently of human attitudes, like force, low the scientific method, but can still thoughts and actions. We can start with I, mass, gravitational attraction and photo- claim to be scientists. With everyone ex- at the centre of my world. As we move synthesis, on the one hand, and on the cept the last demolished, was there any- towards the outside, the world view has other, those whose existence depends on thing left to write or comment about? I unreal dreams and imaginations, tastes human attitudes like money, property, began to see why scientists do not write. and likings, many of them uncommuni- marriage and government. There is a dis- Before they move to the keyboard, the cable. Then come arts, humanities, social tinction, to put it in very simple terms, opposition seems to have demolished science and onto natural science like between those features of the world that each other. Finally I thought I would physics, chemistry on the outermost cir- are observer-independent and those that write anyway, maybe in a more inclusive cle (or sphere). For the present discus- are observer-dependent. Natural sciences way, as the subject of scientific temper, sion we will call the world view up to like physics, chemistry and biology are in my view, is an extremely important and including social science as the inner about features of nature that exist regard- one for the education of younger minds. world and beyond that up to and includ- less of what we think, and social sciences The main complaint against scientists ing natural science as the outer world6. like economics, political science and so- by all the respondents was ‘the claim that The outer world is the objective or ciology are about features of the world, studying science reduces superstition and impersonal world, common to all human that are what they are, because we think, increases scientific temper is not correct. beings (us) which existed before my that is what they are.’ The observer de- One has just to look at the personal lives birth, holds me in it now and will con- pendence that Searle talks about is dif- and institutions of scientists; with a lot of tinue to exist after my death. Though ferent from the one in natural science, superstition, casteism, sexism and other what happens after my death has no real- especially in quantum mechanics. Searle undesirable qualities’. I think this is true. ity for me, I can visualize now, a world is referring to the dependence on CURRENT SCIENCE, VOL. 113, NO. 9, 10 NOVEMBER 2017 1655 COMMENTARY concepts and ideas expressed by the cul- and technology do not bring wisdom. method to the extent possible, are abso- ture, society and state. Science is value-neutral. If one wishes to lutely necessary to tell us if the ‘emperor change the value system that one is born has no clothes’; that is to see the reality into, how does one decide on a new sys- without being blinded by wrong public Observational uncertainties tem of values? opinion. This is specially true in India, Albert Einstein8 has said ‘Those con- where godmen of all types abound. One can have further gradations in social victions which are necessary and deter- This discussion has a special impor- science depending on the nature of sub- minant for our conduct and judgements tance for education, which should pro- jective involvement, as measured by the can notbe found solely along this solid vide guidance for personal ethical uncertainties in observations. The large scientific way. Knowledge of “what is” choices. Scientific temper involves look- uncertainties make individual observa- does not open the door directly to “what ing at a problem, considering the various tions meaningless. We have to have a should be”…, the goal of our human options and deciding what to do. Science large number of observations and use aspirations. Fundamental ends and valua- teaching, in natural sciences, all over the statistical methods for drawing conclu- tions… come into being not through world, is largely a transmission of skills sions. Smaller the sample larger is the demonstrations but through revelations, (mathematical and experimental) and ac- uncertainty, as we can see in the predic- through the medium of powerful person- cepted ideas. It is not good at presenting tions of economics. alities. One must not attempt to justify alternatives to choose from and raising The details of many of the above proc- them, but rather to sense their nature discussions. It is social science, which esses, like construction of the outside simply and clearly’. One makes a per- helps in making suitable choices and cul- world, are subjects of study in them- sonal choice, consciously or uncon- tivating scientific temper. The diminish- selves, especially in philosophy. In these sciously. ing role of social science in the total disciplines many different theories can In the inner world, as we move closer curriculum of science students, at pre- coexist (peacefully or otherwise). I qui- to the centre, heart, rather than the head, sent, leaves them ill-equipped to handle etly accept statements like ‘there is noth- is the decider. Love, compassion, kind- ethical issues and decide or write about ing natural about natural science’. How ness, elation, and ecstasy play a big role them in newspapers and media. Thus the we agree on reality is still not unani- in decisions. In the outer world elation at inclusion of scientific temper in the cur- mously agreed upon in philosophy, the time of creation has to be followed riculum of every student is essential for though most of us have worked out by verification. Soft sciences do not have meaningful education. (hopefully) our own way of deciding such an easy way out. There is the diffi- what is real. cult problem of ‘empirical validity’. In the absence of experimental or mathe- 1. Siddharthan, R., The Wire, 12 August matical proof, validity is by personal sat- 2017.