Changing ‘Principles’ and What They Mean for The Functional World
Science, essentially, is
man’s attempt to understand the world around him. At a fundamental level, this
attempt may spring from an innate need to explain the abstractness of life, but
more practically, it provides man with the ability to interact with ideas and
structures. The genesis of society, culture and technology owes itself to this
enterprise.
What’s quite interesting
here is the role of time in societal progress; for time produces the worst of
satires.
Consider, for instance, the
case of the Earth. Intuition first told man that the earth is flat. The first
recorded disrupters are the Greeks: Ptolemy’s Almagest places the Earth – now
thought to be spherical - at the centre of the universe.
The next disrupters were
Copernicus and Galileo - both purporting that it was the Sun which is central
to the universe. After a protracted struggle, the world came to accept
Heliocentrism. The ultimate irony is the discovery of what is now called The
Milky Way and along with it countless stars and planets.
Our understanding of most
scientific concepts is still extremely fragmentary. The economic and
technological states of society are intimately linked with scientific progress.
Aircrafts – for instance – were only developed after the rationalisation of a
Spherical Earth.
Imagine now, the state of
critical fields such as medicine.
In the 19th century, smoking
was considered indicative of strength of character. Personalities such as
Sigmund Freud and Winston Churchill were almost always seen with cigars. The
theory of humoral balance drove a morbid obsession with leeches and
blood-letting.
Our understanding today says
that a country squire indulgent in nicotine would have only shortened his
lifespan. Critical patients inflicted with phlebotomy would have only worsened.
Here lies of the queerest
paradoxes. Quite obviously, we cannot resign to inactive study. All thought
that does not lead to action is essentially treacherous. Society must ever
continue to function. But at the same time, how certain can we be that what we
know is true? More importantly, how do we act?
For one, actual experimental
results must supplement theoretical speculation. Drug development cycles are
prolonged for this very reason. Yet another solution is practicing actual
evidence-based medicine. Collection and extrapolation of data and
identification of oddities can play a huge role here.
From a more general
perspective, statistics is key. Principled* study can at least rule out certain
incorrect correlations. Recently, the role of vitamins as therapeutic agents
and antibiotics as preventive ones have come under scrutiny. And so, study
continues in the hope that progress will follow.
But, at some level, finding
solace in the idea that the universe may yet elude our understanding seems to
be our only grace; or at least, an escape from the ironies of life.
* Correlation is not causation – et al.
Comments
Post a Comment