|
|
|
|
|
RE:
THE NEW HUMANISTS
From:
Robert R. Provine
Date: 4.17.02 New Humanist Warriors While reading "The New Humanists", I found myself mostly nodding in agreement. After all, Brockman is preaching to the choir. What's not to like? It's difficult to argue with scientific flag and motherhood statements. It's obvious that the rest of the world should think and act more like us. Most scientists use empirical methods to seek that which is deep, elegant, and true, using experimental methods to settle disputes and reject error. The power of good science is that the method is so effective that it transcends mediocre practitioners. Like penicillin, it works despite who dispenses it. Many of the New Humanist values have already gained a foothold in Western society, with the power of technology and medicine converting many skeptics. I was not sure whether to treat the essay as a manifesto, progress report, self-congratulation, or declaration of victory—it's clearly too late in the game for a call to action. Brockman's 1992 essay, "The Emerging Third Culture", had more work to do. I direct attention to a topic neglected in this new essay, the scientist/writer warriors of his New Humanism who are to enlighten, entertain, and change the world. Writing by these Third Culture intellectuals has a personal cost, scientific productivity. (The financial costs were nicely solved by the development of a literary niche.) Few, if any, Nobelists and Nobel class scientists write books, at least while occupied at the lab bench and in hot pursuit of the Prize. The 24/7 schedule of cutting-edge science leaves little time for writing, let alone book writing. Unless scientist/writers are highly efficient, they may become the handmaidens (handbutlers?) of this enterprise, not its leaders. Research reports in refereed journals are the preferred publication form of scientists. And grant writing is necessary to pay laboratory bills and keep university administrators at bay.
While perched before the word processor, a scientist is neither
turning the crank on the research machine nor bringing in
research dollars, but is performing an important service.
Books and key reviews advance the scientific enterprise, especially
in framing issues, organizing scattered material, establishing
new lines of endeavor, and, if directed to a broad audience,
educating the public who finance the research. A book does
this more effectively than shorter, more dispersed journal
articles that may never reach critical mass. However, the
act of writing also benefits the scientist. Text is crystallized
thought, and the act of writing, especially writing in the
long-form of a book, forces intellectual discipline. Writing
is the act of learning what it is that you have to say. Blocking
may reveal the terrible truth that you are confused and need
to rethink what you are trying to do. Writing goes beyond
reporting and is an active tool in intellectual and scientific
activity. It's unfortunate that the fast pace of catch-as-catch-can
modern science makes it difficult for science stories to be
told by those who can tell them best, the scientists who are
doing the work and love what they are doing. |
|
John Brockman,
Editor and Publisher |
|
|Top|
|