That’s nature with a small N.
On Monday, as usual catching a snippet while in the car, I heard part of a radio 4 programme called Science in the Making: Why should we trust science?
In it, two scientists were interviewed. What came across strikingly in the part I heard was the relationship one scientist had with his equipment. He seemed to revel in the fact that it distanced him from the actual biological substance investigated. He enjoyed interacting with the equipment. He said it gave him a feeling of control.
I found this fascinating, because the reason at the end of my physics degree that I didn’t contemplate going into ‘real science’ (apart from my sheer incompetence, which nearly burned down the New Cavendish – but that’s a different story) was that I wanted to do science because I was interested in the how the world worked. I wanted to know about stuff – but all the experiments seemed to come down to reading numbers off black boxes and interpreting them.
I’ve always assumed that scientists would find the ‘hands off’ nature of much of their work, interacting with equipment rather than the world itself, a frustrating if necessary fact of life. I found it quite shocking that this guy actually appreciated the fact that it was technology he was working with, rather than the real world. When he described what he found satisfying, it was the sort of satisfaction I used to get when (computer) programming – solving logic problems in directing the equipment, not scientia.
Is he an oddity, or is this what drives many experimental scientists?
I can well understand that there are some who revel in the technology of science – ever more sophisticated and shiny these days. But for me it is the privileged access to nature that is the driver. Just two days ago we and our collaborators solved a new protein structure, something we’d been working on for several years (and that had demanded the use of some very expensive gadgetry). The chance to see this molecule, that no-one has every seen before, produced a visceral sense of pleasure and wonder. It is these moments of epiphany where one sees a new aspect of nature that bring real joy and I’m sure are shared by many.
I suspect that many scientists who go on to be famous and influence people started life looking at nature (small ‘n’). Theodosius Dobzhansky was a field biologist bfore he joined the Morgan lab, and it was in part due to his insights that the ‘modern synthesis’ was born. James D. Watson started out watching birds (the ornithological variety, at least to begin with) and of course there’s our very own Chuckie D, a consummate observer of nature.
Stephen: It is these moments of epiphany where one sees a new aspect of nature that bring real joy and I’m sure are shared by many.
Boris: Epiphany ! Thanks for such pertinent expression of what science is. I warmly agree :-).