The Rising Bar
The Rising Bar
Recall the content which outlines a kindergarten curriculum. What comes to mind is: basic arithmetic like addition and subtraction, learning how to read, and the basic principles of nature such as weather patterns and seasons. While this information seems rudimentary to all those that are just a couple years ahead of it, these early lessons in language and science are the foundational blocks to an ever-expanding skyscraper of human intelligence. Modern scientists and those concerned with its progress (both financially and practically) are making the case for how science is peaking in certain areas and the current revelations and discoveries do not hold a candle to that which was discovered one hundred years ago. However, the seemingly stagnated standard must be seen as a bar that challenges passionate scientists to push the limits, ask the most unanswerable questions, and deduce even more specific estimations of the truth that help humanity reach its full potential.
The factors that pressure this bias towards science’s decreasing importance are mainly financial. After all, a scientist must support themselves however they can. It is true that scientific fields are becoming more well defined and new scientists are requiring plenty more training in their fields to be caught up with their industry’s standards. But just because physicians are well past chapter one in their textbooks, does not mean there is not an untapped well of potential for discoveries. The issue arrives with the short-term practicality of such new discoveries. If new scientists are not discovering modern solutions to current problems they will not have the financial benefit needed to support their careers and lives. But as the article, “Science isn’t Broken” by Christie Aschwanden concludes, the scientific method is a messy and long process that is not going to yield results right away. It is surrounded by an uncertainty that Aschwanden describes as “inherent in science” and that it “doesn’t mean that we can’t use it to make important policies or decisions. It just means that we should remain cautious and adopt a mindset that’s open to changing course if new data arises.” Faithful, dedicated scientists believe that they are setting the paving stones for bigger and more important discoveries in the future. It is unfortunate that one can not fund an experiment and expect to receive an answer in a transaction, but that does not undermine the importance of each experiment.
As fields of study get more well defined, the unfortunate truth remains that some sciences are newer than others and yield applicable results faster and more readily than others. Computer science and artificial intelligence are current areas with a great deal more potential for discovery, yet they will also experience stagnations in their progress. This should not and does not discourage new scientists in those fields because this is the nature of science and mastery of a subject. The article, “Science Is Getting Less Bang for Its Buck” by Patrick Collison and Michael Nielsen, describes science as a “limited frontier” in which explorers fill out the bounds of a map. This view makes sense when compared to studies independently, so scientists should hold on to the idea that there are more frontiers to be discovered and explored. Just as computer science was an undiscovered land two hundred years ago, so might be other undefined sciences.
While it may seem that cost and practicality are the major setbacks on current scientists, modern science must push back these limitations to discover the deepest truths of nature. While there may be diminishing returns with its discoveries, any progress towards getting a better picture of the universe is worth it in the greater picture in the history of science.
Comments
Post a Comment