Simple Sustained Meaningless Metaphor For Science

Welcome to the Agglomeration

An interesting analogy born from TOK class. This time the spotlight is focused on science.

TOK Journal Entry 4 – The Role of Scientists in Science

Scientists have played a major role in advancing science over the past hundreds of years and we do not doubt that they have been a necessary component of this social construct thus far. The question posed today, however, was:

“Can we remove the scientists from science?”

To explore this, let me present to you an analogy. Imagine a room. No, not that kind of room! Yes ok, that room is better. Now let’s say that this room was a special room. No, not that kind of special room! This room is a room specifically designed to be a room for Cranberry Juice Production. The strict enforcement of immigration and emigration to and from the room is to the extent that only those affiliated with the production of cranberry juice production are allowed inside, and only those who have died can leave. Ok, perhaps that is extending the metaphor a bit TOO far. Ignore that sinister bit and let’s get back to the room.

Ok, so the room is located in the middle of this place we’ll call A, and the place is A, and A is the place, and everything that isn’t A, isn’t the place, and everything that isn’t the place, isn’t A. Ok so we A, which houses all those involved in cranberry juice production, and then we have B, which is essentially everything that is outside A. Imagine a Venn diagram where B is the universal set, and A is a set inside that but it’s only mutually inclusive in the way that they all belong to the universal set of human beings, except who those in B are non-cranberry juice producers and those in A are cranberry juice producers. Yes, it’s not often you have to imagine in what is also an ‘imagine’ metaphor, but then again, so’s your cat.

Moving on, now that we’ve established that A is crucial to the future industry of cranberry juice production and that all the people inside A are cranberryjuiceproductioneers who produce cranberry juice, let’s try and imagine that all the cranberryjuiceproductioneers are killed by some mysterious disease, possibly orange juice deficiency, or what is otherwise known as scurvy. Now that these cranberryjuiceproductioneers are all dead, what happens to the production of cranberry juice? That’s right; it stops, because despite the good will and intention of the ghosts of the cranberryjuiceproductioneers, ghosts simply can’t operate cranberry juice making machines.

Now that was a very long-winded way of saying that scientists are essential in what we know as science. The example we used in class was Newton and his law of gravity, but since I’m inherently predisposed to such things as saying ‘You just lost the game’ and also mentioning Godwin’s Law like I have some uncontrollable controllable form of Tourette’s, let’s use the related example of Fudgewick and the Law of the Squeegees instead. Oh wait that doesn’t exist. So back to Newton then.

The thing is, science is a human construct, and by associating certain concepts with names we do two things. We associate a certain understanding with that concept and we enslave that concept to forever remain as that concept and so now even if we wanted to call gravity ‘applefalldownitus’, we can’t. There are probably many forces that are occurring in the world right now which we can’t explain. But the blue sky is just a symptom of global depression, wooden doors actually prefer to not be subjunctive, and this report is merely the Enigma code 50 years ago haphazardly rearranged into neat intelligent sentences.

My point is that that which does not have a name at present doesn’t exist. That’s right, Quillkatinizsu, I just disproved your existence. Bad luck, try again next year.

Only when we have put a label on a certain concept and its resemblance in our world can we build to our existing framework and understanding of the nature of reality. Now we call everyone who does this, scientists, and this framework that the scientists build science. So by logical extension, that is which is built by someone cannot exist without that builder having built it first. Although less cran-tastic, science can be likened to the product of those in A, and all non-outsiders as B. If by some chance we found that all the inhabitants of A(Science) – to distinguish it from A(Cranberry) of course – had actually forged passports and were nearly illegally trespassing in hypothetical soil and were metaphorically deported to B(Science), we realise that the scientific discovery is halted inside A, unless of course the former inhabitants of A had developed some sort of long-distance matter manipulation machine during their stay. Let’s assume for argument’s sake that this doesn’t happen.

We realise that science becomes static, and as time goes by, and the generations of former A(Science) residents die and produce new offspring, this area becomes forgotten, and with it the notion of science itself. That is why I believe that yes we CAN remove the scientists from science, it is an extremely foolhardy approach, not unlike taking a brass sword, swapping it for a couple of marshmallows and impaling yourself on a sanded chopstick wielded by a eight eyed Eskimo.

Essentially, we don’t want to remove the scientists from science don’t want A(Science) to become the stuff of legend, because even if we’re too stupid to learn from the mistakes of the Trojans and their horse, at least let us not let science become the next Atlantis.

Till next time, may you agglomerate all your unpremeditated contemplations.