Science doesn’t have a monopoly on good ideas
At the start of the 20th century, physicists faced profound questions about what the strange new mathematical framework of the dawning quantum age revealed about the true nature of reality. After struggling with the problem, many have opted for a simple response: shut up and calculate.
This mantra, which reflects a preference for using the tools of quantum mechanics without thinking too much about their philosophical implications, could just as easily have been a rallying cry for science as a whole. Scientists often prefer to focus only on what they can calculate and avoid other ways of knowing. Only recently has the study of consciousness been considered a scientific discipline, rather than being best left to philosophical thinkers, for example. Meanwhile, some climate researchers are content to produce models demonstrating the effects of increased emissions on the atmosphere, but refuse to cite the policy implications of solving the problem, for fear of going too far beyond the science.
HAS New scientistwe of course believe that science is the best way to make sense of the world, but that doesn’t mean it has to be the only way. As we explore, a more pluralistic approach to ideas has the potential to reap intellectual benefits when it comes to answering big questions such as “where do the laws of nature come from?”
“
The lesson is not to reject philosophy, but rather to view it as another tool.
“
But in allowing philosophy to enter the laboratory, we must not allow it to be accompanied by dogmas or heavy-handed proofs and the scientific method. One recent case that may have gone too far is the idea that trees share resources through a “forest network.” As ecologist Suzanne Simard explains, the backlash that led her to promote the idea came from people feeling like she had gone beyond the limits of what science could say.
The lesson, however, is not to reject philosophy – as calculating quantum physicists have done – but rather to view it as another tool in the scientific toolbox. Science does not have a monopoly on good ideas, and as long as they can be supported by evidence, knowledge from other disciplines should be welcome.
