Medical hypotheses
-
The majority of professional scientists make use of the artefacts of science but lack understanding of what these mean; raising the question: has the tradition of science been broken? Explicit knowledge is only a selective summary but practical capability derives from implicit, traditional or 'tacit' knowledge that is handed on between- and across-generations by slow, assimilative processes requiring extended human contact through a wide range of situations. This was achieved mainly by prolonged apprenticeship to a Master. Such methods recognize the gulf between being able to do something and knowing how you have done it; and the further gap between knowing how you have done something and being able to teach it by explicit instructions. ⋯ Most of modern science is therefore apparently in the post-holocaust situation described in A canticle for Liebowitz and After Virtue, but the catastrophe was bureaucratic, rather than violent. So, the tradition has indeed been broken. However, for as long as the fact is known that the tradition has been broken, and living representatives of the tradition are still alive and active, there still exists a remote possibility that the tradition could be revived.
-
Humans are an unusual species because they exhibit an economic division of labour. Most theories concerning the evolution of specifically human intelligence have focused either on economic problems or sexual selection mechanisms, both of which apply more to men than women. Yet while there is evidence for men having a slightly higher average IQ, the sexual dimorphism of intelligence is not obvious (except at unusually high and low levels). ⋯ However, the effect of maternal IQ on child mortality would probably only be of major evolutionary significance in environments where childhood mortality rates were high. The modern situation is that population growth is determined mostly by birth rates; so in modern conditions, maternal intelligence may no longer have a significant effect on reproductive success; the effect of female IQ on reproductive success is often negative. Nonetheless, in the past it is plausible that the link between maternal IQ and child survival constituted a strong selection pressure acting specifically on women.
-
In a recent series of polemical editorials in this journal, a scathing and much needed criticism is made of many aspects of current scientific mores, detecting some worrying dysfunctions which threaten the integrity of the whole scientific enterprise. Although the tone is a bit hyperbolic, many important issues are addressed, such as honesty in research, the centrality of truth in science, the role of creativity, just to cite a few. Though agreeing with the overall diagnosis, the discussion still suffers from a lack of a clear and systemic view of science, from which a more precise analysis could be carried out. ⋯ In this paper we address these shortcomings with the aim of contributing to a better understanding of this timely discussion. Though conceding that major structural, historical and cultural shifts might have caused irreversible changes on the way science now evolves, we make some suggestions to counter this trend. These include, among others, the need for an honest and careful dealing with the media and public, to prize and abide by the ethos of science and its underlying values, to cultivate an exact philosophy and to insist that disinterested curiosity and the desire to understand the world are the vital motivations of science.
-
Why is modern science less efficient than it used to be, why has revolutionary science declined, and why has science become so dishonest? One plausible explanation behind these observations comes from an essay First and second things published by CS Lewis. First Things are the goals that are given priority as the primary and ultimate aim in life. Second Things are subordinate goals or aims - which are justified in terms of the extent to which they assist in pursuing First Things. ⋯ When the senior scientists, whose role is to uphold standards, fail to posses or respond-to informed conscience, science will inevitably go rotten from the head downwards. What, then, motivates a scientist to act upon conscience? I believe it requires a fundamental conviction of the reality and importance of truth as an essential part of the basic purpose and meaning of life. Without some such bedrock moral underpinning, there is little possibility that individual scientific conscience would ever have a chance of holding-out against an insidious drift toward corruption enforced by peer consensus.
-
This article is meant for, but not confined to, younger scientists who may have a series of ideas, hypotheses and projects--be they small or big--and might grapple with the objective to pursue and complete at least some, and preferably most, work in due course. And yet, the very generation, development and completion of numerous projects takes gestation periods which can be long and painful. Importantly, this simple but important truth is valid for any creative process, be it in the sciences or in the arts. ⋯ With reference to how some of Peter Doig's paintings evolve over long times and to how John Eccles and Isaac Newton worked, extended gestation periods as a key similarity of creative work by both artists and scientists are exemplified and vindicated. It is concluded that long gestation periods of creative work should be viewed as the expectation rather than the exception. Importantly, the evolutionary and somewhat intuitive commitment to several projects at the same, and often extended, periods of time can be a recipe for revolutionary results fostered by the required variation and diversity of thinking and cross-fertilization of--seemingly--unrelated themes and fields.