It was a slow realisation, based mainly on the fact that medical knowledge has many aspects that are quite inaccessible to other scientific fields. That is not to say that physics or mathematics are free playgrounds for just about anyone but life sciences have to do with the emergent abilities of biological systems, something which for the moment is far beyond any attempt at mathematical formulation (whereas all other scientific fields are solely based on mathematics and thus totally dependent on them).
There however is where the problems start, and I will choose the Theory of Evolution to illustrate my point.
I think, though I can find no definitive source for that, that it was Jacques Monod who said "The problem with Evolution is that everybody thinks they understand it".
At some point or the other almost everyone must have heard an opinion on evolution and most likely that opinion came from a person that had nothing to do with biological sciences.
Why is it that people do not freely offer their strong opinion on other scientific fields as well, like the Bloch equations for electron movement in a metal lattice or stress distribution along the hull of a ship?
Why do they not stage rallies and protests against the General Theory of Relativity?
One might say that it is because of the lack of solid mathematical grounding.
Indeed, since even the simplest biological systems are so complex that they cannot be described mathematically, biological sciences lose the intimidation of mathematical formulae that keep morons away from the rest of the "hard" sciences. Given a relatively "neutral" subject - like Pauli's exclusion principle, morons will keep their mouths shut (as long as they have never heard of non-Euclidian geometry).
However, should any issue veer towards philosophical-moral-social matters (say, if the General Theory of Relativity ventures towards the Big Bang), then anyone feels free to say "Naw... I don't believe that was how it happened". PATHETIC!. Sadly, intimidating mathematics alone cannot guarantee peace of mind. It is impossible for people to keep their mouth shut, even before the space-time continuum, if abstraction is involved.
The discussion about Evolution falls along these lines. It is as valid as ANY other scientific theory as it has a solid mathematical groundwork (largely thanks to the great statistician and geneticist Ronald Fisher) and the fact that a single controversial find (such as a rabbit fossil in a Triassic period rock formation) can negate it. Such a find is yet to be discovered. However since there isn't a sufficient number of observations that can prove a theory but a single conntradicting one IS sufficient to disprove it, it remains a theory.
Since its very conception, however, it has been the object of much controversy, slander and misinterpretation. Famous among these is the sociobiological notion of the "survival of the fittest" coined by a particularly narrow-minded man of limited abilities, Herbert Spencer.
From that time onward, the greatest leap in biological thinking and the third greatest in ALL science after Newton's and Einstein's work is by word-of-mouth corrupted, distorted and vulgarized and all of this because people THINK they understand it.
THERE lies the difference. Our body, and terrestrial life in general, is not the Cosmos. It is readily observable. When Science dethroned Aristotelian and, by extension, Ecclesiastical authority, it made the mistake of not asserting its own Authority in the form of proper education. And though the rest of the sciences have fear of mathematics as a mighty citadel to protect their prestige most of the time, life sciences are wide open to ignoramus' attacks that are many times as harmful for they hamper the development of research that would ultimately turn its weapons against human disease and pain.
(to be continued...)
3 comments:
As you put it George, the problem that the theory of evolution faces is that it is expressed with a few simple sentences that seem to be easily understood by almost anyone. Thus, it has become a subject of controversy not only among scientific circles but also among people of various backgrounds.
Although people tend to accept theories such as that of relativity of time without second thoughts, the evolution theory is put to the question. This happens just because most people do not have the scientific background to challenge the mathematical equations of the theory of relativity and their modifications and they accept it as cool and Einstein and his ''logo'' E=mc2 can be found almost everywher,from posters to T-shirts!
I believe that the problem with life sciences lies in the ground that we take as granted that homo sapiens is the ultimate and most perfect creature ever made.We miss the fact that intelligence is our only difference with other life forms that has helped us develop technology and become the most prevalent mammal on planet earth.We are not divine or something supernatural, we are just the outcome of millions years of evolution. There are also other life forms such as bacteria who seem to be perfectly adapted to their environment as they are also a product of evolution.
Last but not least, life at the cellular and molecular level seem to be much more complicated. The variety of molecular mechanisms that a cell has developed can also be explained by the evolution theory.
Closing this comment, life sciences have come to a standstill many times throughout our history;eg. human anatomy was prohibited in medieval times,stem cell research was regarded as unethical, but at the end we usually come to the conclusion that we had just misconceived the essence and the purposes of biological studies.
PS1. Sorry for my long comment George. You know that science is my favourite subject.
PS2. I think we should pay tribute to the first books of Richard Dawkins, the ''Selfish Gene'' and the ''Blind Watchmaker'' which approached evolution theory in a pure scientific and simplistic way.
The good Christian should beware of mathematicians and all those who make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that mathematicians have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and confine man in the bonds of Hell
- Dennis: I will come to Dawkins and his work in time. By writing this post I understood how hard it is to speak of concepts that we are familiar with from the level of organic chemistry and upwards for so long that they seem nothing less than absolutely obvious by now.
- findwhosaidit: I should have made clear the fact that this blog DOES NOT promote tolerance and understanding among people. Fundamentalists and other subhumans will be treated like the crap they are. Mathematics are the ULTIMATE science, despite the limitations imposed by our imperfect intellectual processes and they re the only key to our understanding of the world. There is no need to explain anything to you, or to show you the errors of anti-scientific thought. You are not worth the effort. It should all be clear by now since there is nothing of the occult or the mystical in the process of Western Science. Either you are with us or you are against us. And since you are against us, you will be trodden upon like the vermin you are.
I choose to keep your comment this time as an introduction to this warning, but you will be given no more space for your pathetic views. Any more comments without rational arguments will be instantly deleted. This is war and it is about time we employ any weapon in our arsenal. Enough.
Post a Comment