Longest post ever.

This is one of those posts that seemed to have point to it when I first start out, but soon start to lose momentum. I decided to finish and publish it anyway. Be nice when commenting.

A science is any discipline in which the fool of this generation can go beyond the point reached by the genius of the last generation. – Max Gluckman.

I saw this quote in my thermodynamics textbook, and it vaguely reminded me of something that I read about in Jurassic Park about eight years ago. In essence, it was about how dangerous science could be in the wrong hands. To illustrate that point, Ian Malcolm used the analogy of the martial arts. Both are disciplines, but in the martial arts, you don’t become a black belt without first going through the yellow, green, blue and so on. His contention was that masters of those disciplines got through a long learning process that goes beyond understanding the art of combat. When a master has perfected the art of killing with his bare hands, he has the discipline not to.

But scientists didn’t have to do the same. A new researcher now just has to pick off from where the old retired professor left off. And according to Malcolm, those researchers are not very likely to exercise caution when doing their research. To him, it was like putting an AK-47 in a monkey’s hands and then crudely gesturing to it to pull the trigger. At least that is the link that was made.

I was 13 at that time, and I bought it. I was surrounded by news of pollution and the destruction of planet earth by humans, and blaming science for all of that made a whole lot of sense. It is an overly simplistic way of looking at the situation, I know. But it made sense at that time.

I continued to believe that humans were to be blamed for the destruction of the earth, and that we would ultimately wipe ourselves off this planet.

I believed that, if humans had a purpose, it was the same as the meteor’s. To wipe the slate clean so that the next stage of life may take its place on earth. Life had been reset on Earth a number of times, after all.

That was what I thought of science. Unknowing to the consequences, we have developed technology that we cannot use responsibly. But that’s not the reason for this post. I write this because of the increasing specialization that takes place, not only in science, but everywhere else. Specialization is one of the marks of civilized society, but I really do think that it is taking its toll now.

I was reading the Dilbert blog recently and he was talking about global warming. He said that he was reluctant to write about the matter, seeing that he knew jack shit about it. So he started doing research. And the amount of information that he had to sift through was mind-boggling. Both sides had a story to tell, and both sides chose to tell it in a way that would serve them best (which is obvious). That means using half truths and then telling them as if they meant something. Both sides would use every piece of leverage they could find even if it meant bending the truth. In the end, it makes reading about the subject a pain in the ass. Which is a bit of a problem, since it affects every one of us, and is likely to affect us in this lifetime. There is a lot of money at stake here, and nobody wants to lose out.

If everyone in the world was bothered to research the issue, then this wouldn’t be that big a problem. But the problem now is that a lot of people don’t know that they need to. In the end, if the public were to have to make a decision about global warming, it’s the side with the better PR that is going to win the public vote.

Then there is the courts of law and policy making in governments. Both will have to make decisions about issues that are fundamentally rooted in science, but do not have the knowledge to do so. In the end, they end up relying on expert witnesses and their testimonies, but that might not be enough to get the correct message across. Simplifying scientific ideas into layman’s terms has a dangerous effect of being easily misunderstood and taken out of context. It is my opinion that a president or a jury cannot possibly make an informed decision without first studying the subject extensively. Which in the current world is almost impossible to do, seeing that we have so many disputes to settle, so many decisions to make and so few people who can make them. Expert testimony is all too easily bought or obtained through some shady means. Its just a question of whether or not the stakes are high enough for the respective players to play hard ball.

This ultimately leads to the concept that our legal and administrative systems have their inherent weaknesses. I know that this makes me sound incredibly gullible and naïve, but I had, and probably still have a lot of faith in the laws of the land. I actually believed that the police force would protect me as long as I didn’t break the law. I actually thought that our laws were water tight and would take an effort of monumental proportions to abuse. Apparently, it really isn’t that difficult, no matter which legal system you look at.

This post looks terribly disjointed, but in my head, its all linked. The thought of people misinterpreting science for their own agenda sickens me, but the writing is on the wall. It is really easy to do, given the will and enough resources. And there is nothing anyone can do to stop it. Except bend their own will and resource to combat it when they don’t agree. It ends up becoming a war of attrition in a battle to gain influence. I don’t like the idea that justice sides the one with a lot of money, but apparently, that’s how it works. So excuse me while I get used to this new cynical view of law.