SCIENTIFIC INDIFFERENCE
Re-thinking the classical outlook on the role of Science
What is science about? Creating life saving inventions? Making truck loads of money out of your inventions? Trying to spread happiness and liberate the people?
NO. Science is about finding new things and understanding the details; it is a flow of love a scientist has for the world. His paper on the undertaken work reflects what he wishes for the world or what he returns to the world for its benevolence. You don’t get very far by thinking about fame, money, power or prestige. These never mattered and never will. You don’t become a scientist so that you feel like a rockstar. The thrust of this agreement would describe my vision of an ideal scientist, who I think the world really needs.
Every profession is a combination/mixture of its component skill sets/ talents. Every colour is a mixture of constituent colours. Similar analogy may be applied to a man/woman of science- a scientist is a strange blend of an inventor/thinker and a journalist/reporter. So, now you can fathom what a scientist can/should do. The outcomes of the experiments/studies of a scientist usually appeal to enterprises which turn them into profit. But, that profit alone does not drive a scientist.
Today the focuses of major research organisations are profit, papers and personal gain ‘3 P’s’. Science is now an industry which churns out the 3 P’s endlessly to an ever thirsty world. People think technology can provide all the solutions, it can save the world from our war path etc., I do not agree, I don’t think technology alone can get us back to shore. Technology is akin to a breeze which can move a yacht; you must use it only if it will take you in the right direction. If it takes you in the opposite direction you must not capitalize on it. My test to determine a competency or interest of a student, faculty, and researcher in his/her field of work is simple: just ask him/her “what would you buy if I give you a couple crores to further pursue your research and help the world”. Eighty percent of the respondents would say that they can’t think of anything at the moment. Most of the rest would say that they want better, bigger computer clusters. Really? We have trivialised research to such an extent. What do you need to help the world? – Computers. What will the solution of a climate researcher be to combat climate change? – Simple, faster computers. What does a structural chemist need to make better LCD displays, solar cells? – Computer models. I would not be surprised if people would use computers to SIMULATE pouring acid into beakers. What has the world come to? Computers are fast, easy and effective but they are still computers. However accurate your climate model is going to be, it’s still a model and it is still numbers/graphs on a computer screen. SIMULATING anything does not guarantee any results or makes things happen. Some are so proud of their work; that they claim to be able to change the world simply by punching a couple of keys. We completely undermine the work of a true DOER, he who sits in the heat, works on the roads and grows your food? A scientist today relies quite a bit on programs. I’m in favour of such work; I think it is quite important. My incapability to perform such work may be a cause for my angst toward programming. But, let me tell you, no matter how smart you are, you still have to actually MAKE something for it to be of help to the world. A Simulation of a solar panel does not generate any electricity at all! A simulation of a farm does not give food to eat!
We need people in science who love their craft and feel a passionate need to exploit their gift for the general good. We need scientists who would chuck his/her computer and gladly get their hands dirty. I feel scientists with an emotional connection to the people they want to helping would help them create better work for their main audience. Let us witness another revolution! Here’s to all the men and women who think they owe the planet more than mere computer programmes.
Finally to end with quote of Wernher von Braun
“Research is what I’m doing when I don’t know what I’m doing.“
Vishal Chandrashekar
Junior Research Fellow
Divecha Centre for Climate Change
Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore
Presently offered admission in University of Michigan,
In the subject Sustainable Systems
- SCIENTIFIC INDIFFERENCE - April 29, 2014
Dear Bhargav,
Anger since I am working in the same department and I work only on fabricating & designing products for the impoverished. I just feel that more people should pay attention to making products. This article is something that people can learn, it is an inside view of today’s scientific community; their views, beliefs and what they think is important. Since I am one of them my experiences are likely to make you think again about the premier institutions. It is something quite a few people feel but dont write about it. Following posts shall be more technical. First, people must gather what today’s perception of science is among the scientists.
Thank you for taking time out, any comment is most welcome.
I feel he is anger with the other scientific community, climate modelling community, which he is incompetence in his own words. The rest of the article is trivial. The very nature of writing article is to enlighten the audience, share knowledge, and inspire. It should not be platform to showcase your anguish out of your incompetence. Rather than I feel he should have shared his contributions or knowledge he gained.
Thank you, hoping it makes sense to the readers!
Excellent Post Vishal….I wish you all the very best…Thank You… 🙂
nice 1 vishal.. all d best…