The Fitful Path Of Progress In Science: Set Back By Prematurity, Spurred By Creativity

Most scientists--including me--hold to the idea that there is a "real world" out there and that experimental and observational science, objectively interpreted, is gradually unveiling a true picture of it. Impressed by the power of modern research tools and by superbly trained leaders of research, one is tempted to perceive the rapid advance of the natural sciences as smooth paths, ever more closely approximating a complete and correct understanding of the natural world. Fortunately, the actual picture has been less predictable--and more interesting. Newton's universe was deconstructed and reconstructed by Einstein; Einstein's picture of the universe, in turn, is being extended by black holes, pulsars, and cosmic strings. Darwin's world has been deconstructed and reconstructed by the neo-Darwinists, but their authority is now being called into question by neutral evolution, the selfish gene, punctuated equilibria, saltation, and horizontal gene flow. The path to truth is beset by partial truths. Scientists must try to avoid entrapment by partial truths--to have their thinking circumscribed by current orthodoxies. Why do scientists find it difficult to liberate their thinking from current orthodoxies? This question was examined most perceptively by Gunther Stent in a December 1972 article in Scientific American (227[6]:84-93) entitled "Prematurity and Uniqueness in Scientific Discovery." Citing a series of cases in which important scientific discoveries were initially ignored, only to be rediscovered later, Stent concludes that the discoveries were set aside at first because they were "premature"--they were too far outside the then-accepted body of knowledge and could not be logically connected to it. Acceptance came when advances on related problems clarified the causal and logical connections. (A famous example: Mendel's discovery of discrete hereditary units in 1865 remained unrecognized for 35 years until the description of chromosomes, mitosis, and meiosis pointed to a plausible physical mechanism that could explain the duplication, transmission, and segregation of the hereditary units.) In the process of the establishment of many important scientific advances, two phases may be distinguished: the conception and development of an idea in the mind of the discoverer and, subsequently, its acceptance by the scientific community (sometimes much later). In both phases, congruity to preexisting idea structures is required. Following the tenets and perspective of structuralism, Stent pictures a process of discovery that takes place in the "prepared mind" of the scientist. The prepared mind, he contends, has processed and selected pertinent data and, in turn, has conceived a unique construct--a gestalt--that is then complemented and completed by a new result or idea. The first phase of the establishment of the new scientific concept is completed once it has been formulated and published by the discoverer; in the second phase, acceptance by the scientific establishment follows if the discovery can be connected to current knowledge. One may add that advances in natural science are distinctive because, in both phases, logical consistency and connection with previous knowledge are required. Historically, men and women have been constrained to adopt the myths and mental universe of their parents because they had no practical access to alternative ways of thinking. This culture-enforced uniformity of thought or ideology has characterized such sharply contrasting societies as the Egypt of the pharaohs, the France of the medieval church, the Mexico of the Aztecs, and the Soviet Union of Stalin. Fortunately for us, our diverse, multicultural milieu gives us access to a broad range of mental universes and the freedom to pick and choose among their offerings. In this environment scientific creativity and bold ideas have flourished. Otto E. Landman is a professor emeritus of biology at Georgetown University, Washington, D.C. His most recent published paper is "The Inheritance of Acquired Characteristics" (Annual Review of Genetics, 25:1-20, 1991).

The Fitful Path Of Progress In Science: Set Back By Prematurity, Spurred By Creativity

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of