Page:Sm all cc.pdf/190

 evolution by natural selection forced another radical revision of self-image: not people as the designated masters of animals, but people as distant relatives of all other animals. The Copernican revolution was resisted and the Darwinian revolution is still resisted because of unwillingness to relinquish self-importance. “Most laymen, when they contemplate the effect physics may have had upon their lives, think of technology, war, automation. What they usually do not consider is the effect of science upon their way of reasoning.” [Baker, 1970]

Science and the Arts
As scientists reach out to society, attempting to dispel misconceptions of science, shall we consider the arts as allies or opponents? Are there two cultures, scientific and literary, separated by a gulf of misunderstanding and conflicting values? C. P. Snow [1964] argued persuasively that there are. Most of us have met both scientists and artists whose scorn for the other culture is vast: “It may be important to great thinkers to examine the world, to explain and despise it. But I think it is only important to love the world, not to despise it,. . . to regard the world and ourselves and all beings with love, admiration and respect.” [Hesse, 1923]

“In fact, pure science. . . is at once a substitute for logic as a discipline for the mind and an expression of an insatiable desire for the conquest of all knowledge, for an intellectual mastery of the universe.” [Burns, 1963]

“The highest Art of every kind is based upon Science – that without Science there can be neither perfect production nor full appreciation.” [Spencer, 1883] Such individuals separate themselves from a potentially enriching aspect of life by a barrier built at least partially upon misconceptions. The barrier is permeable: many scientists, particularly physicists, are also amateur musicians. A few remarkable individuals, such as Leonardo da Vinci and Benjamin Franklin, excelled in both cultures. I suspect that today’s cultural separation is largely a failure to communicate.

Science and art share some key features. Creativity is the source of vitality in both. Science has no monopoly on subjecting that creativity to a rigorous, critical attitude, as any art critic would point out. Virtuosity of both design and technical performance is a hallmark of the best in science and the arts. Both science and poetry are “acts of imagination grounded in reality. . . These two great ways of seeing lie on the same imaginative continuum.” [Timpane, 1991].

The craftsmen differ more in their tools than in their skills.

Science and Pseudoscience
In examining links between science and society, or between science and art, we assume agreement at least on what science is and is not. But how does one distinguish science from pseudoscience? Most scientists do so on a case-by-case basis, with a demarcation that is subjective and value-dependent.