Trim & Shift

Your theory is crazy, but it's not crazy enough to be true - Niels Bohr

Thursday, June 02, 2005

George Orwell .. who?

As a requirement for the school of engineering, we are required to take 3030 "Writing in Science." Although the title of the class sounds appealing, the work thus far is, in my opinion, lame. First assignment, summarize in 280 words or less George Orwell's essay on "What is science?" Today's class, to submit our summary and critique by classmates. I've posted mine if you wish to comment.

Found in a 1945 British Socialist weekly, (The Tribune) a social critic, George Orwell, reacts to a letter by J. Stewart Cook who proposes a method to circumvent the perils of a “scientific hierarchy.” One of Cook’s proposals includes the recommendation that society, as a whole, should be scientifically educated. Although Orwell appears to agree with Cook’s statement, he shortly arrives at Cook’s implication on the meaning of science. Orwell describes Cook’s definition of science as studies of exact sciences that are performed in laboratories, which disregards other studies such as economics and sociology for example. Orwell suggests that the term science be based on rational thought and critical thinking in any course of study and not just a label for the exact sciences. Orwell supports his claim by providing a condition that the opinion of scientist (such as a chemist or a physicist) on moral and social issues be of more value to that of the opinions from an individual that was not provided the same training or education as received by a scientist. He enforces his statements by negating the idea that scientists are intellectually superior compared to other professionals. Additionally, Orwell introduces the comment that a person with training in the exact sciences, or even a master of a specific science, does not certify the scientist to encompass a “humane or skeptical outlook.” Spotlighting the physicists that contributed to the development of the atomic bomb, Orwell attempts to convince his readers that the scientists were merely carrying out their work and were not open minded to the overall affects of the device they were creating.