Skip to Main Content (access key 1)
Skip to Search (access key 2)
Skip to Search GO (access key 3)
Skip to comments (access key 4)
Skip to navigation (access key 5)
Skip to top of page (access key 6)
Sunday, June 1, 2008 | Reason : In the News | print version Print | Comments

Document Put a Little Science in Your Life

by Brian Greene

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/01/opinion/01greene.html?ex=1212984000&en=d1bd4cd7cfefa238&ei=5070&emc=eta1

Put a Little Science in Your Life
By BRIAN GREENE

A COUPLE of years ago I received a letter from an American soldier in Iraq. The letter began by saying that, as we've all become painfully aware, serving on the front lines is physically exhausting and emotionally debilitating. But the reason for his writing was to tell me that in that hostile and lonely environment, a book I'd written had become a kind of lifeline. As the book is about science — one that traces physicists' search for nature's deepest laws — the soldier's letter might strike you as, well, odd.

But it's not. Rather, it speaks to the powerful role science can play in giving life context and meaning. At the same time, the soldier's letter emphasized something I've increasingly come to believe: our educational system fails to teach science in a way that allows students to integrate it into their lives.

Allow me a moment to explain.

When we consider the ubiquity of cellphones, iPods, personal computers and the Internet, it's easy to see how science (and the technology to which it leads) is woven into the fabric of our day-to-day activities. When we benefit from CT scanners, M.R.I. devices, pacemakers and arterial stents, we can immediately appreciate how science affects the quality of our lives. When we assess the state of the world, and identify looming challenges like climate change, global pandemics, security threats and diminishing resources, we don't hesitate in turning to science to gauge the problems and find solutions.

And when we look at the wealth of opportunities hovering on the horizon — stem cells, genomic sequencing, personalized medicine, longevity research, nanoscience, brain-machine interface, quantum computers, space technology — we realize how crucial it is to cultivate a general public that can engage with scientific issues; there's simply no other way that as a society we will be prepared to make informed decisions on a range of issues that will shape the future.

These are the standard — and enormously important — reasons many would give in explaining why science matters.

But here's the thing. The reason science really matters runs deeper still. Science is a way of life. Science is a perspective. Science is the process that takes us from confusion to understanding in a manner that's precise, predictive and reliable — a transformation, for those lucky enough to experience it, that is empowering and emotional. To be able to think through and grasp explanations — for everything from why the sky is blue to how life formed on earth — not because they are declared dogma but rather because they reveal patterns confirmed by experiment and observation, is one of the most precious of human experiences.

As a practicing scientist, I know this from my own work and study. But I also know that you don't have to be a scientist for science to be transformative. I've seen children's eyes light up as I've told them about black holes and the Big Bang. I've spoken with high school dropouts who've stumbled on popular science books about the human genome project, and then returned to school with newfound purpose. And in that letter from Iraq, the soldier told me how learning about relativity and quantum physics in the dusty and dangerous environs of greater Baghdad kept him going because it revealed a deeper reality of which we're all a part.

It's striking that science is still widely viewed as merely a subject one studies in the classroom or an isolated body of largely esoteric knowledge that sometimes shows up in the "real" world in the form of technological or medical advances. In reality, science is a language of hope and inspiration, providing discoveries that fire the imagination and instill a sense of connection to our lives and our world.

If science isn't your strong suit — and for many it's not — this side of science is something you may have rarely if ever experienced. I've spoken with so many people over the years whose encounters with science in school left them thinking of it as cold, distant and intimidating. They happily use the innovations that science makes possible, but feel that the science itself is just not relevant to their lives. What a shame.

Like a life without music, art or literature, a life without science is bereft of something that gives experience a rich and otherwise inaccessible dimension.

It's one thing to go outside on a crisp, clear night and marvel at a sky full of stars. It's another to marvel not only at the spectacle but to recognize that those stars are the result of exceedingly ordered conditions 13.7 billion years ago at the moment of the Big Bang. It's another still to understand how those stars act as nuclear furnaces that supply the universe with carbon, oxygen and nitrogen, the raw material of life as we know it.

And it's yet another level of experience to realize that those stars account for less than 4 percent of what's out there — the rest being of an unknown composition, so-called dark matter and energy, which researchers are now vigorously trying to divine.

As every parent knows, children begin life as uninhibited, unabashed explorers of the unknown. From the time we can walk and talk, we want to know what things are and how they work — we begin life as little scientists. But most of us quickly lose our intrinsic scientific passion. And it's a profound loss.

A great many studies have focused on this problem, identifying important opportunities for improving science education. Recommendations have ranged from increasing the level of training for science teachers to curriculum reforms.

But most of these studies (and their suggestions) avoid an overarching systemic issue: in teaching our students, we continually fail to activate rich opportunities for revealing the breathtaking vistas opened up by science, and instead focus on the need to gain competency with science's underlying technical details.

In fact, many students I've spoken to have little sense of the big questions those technical details collectively try to answer: Where did the universe come from? How did life originate? How does the brain give rise to consciousness? Like a music curriculum that requires its students to practice scales while rarely if ever inspiring them by playing the great masterpieces, this way of teaching science squanders the chance to make students sit up in their chairs and say, "Wow, that's science?"

In physics, just to give a sense of the raw material that's available to be leveraged, the most revolutionary of advances have happened in the last 100 years — special relativity, general relativity, quantum mechanics — a symphony of discoveries that changed our conception of reality. More recently, the last 10 years have witnessed an upheaval in our understanding of the universe's composition, yielding a wholly new prediction for what the cosmos will be like in the far future.

These are paradigm-shaking developments. But rare is the high school class, and rarer still is the middle school class, in which these breakthroughs are introduced. It's much the same story in classes for biology, chemistry and mathematics.

At the root of this pedagogical approach is a firm belief in the vertical nature of science: you must master A before moving on to B. When A happened a few hundred years ago, it's a long climb to the modern era. Certainly, when it comes to teaching the technicalities — solving this equation, balancing that reaction, grasping the discrete parts of the cell — the verticality of science is unassailable.

But science is so much more than its technical details. And with careful attention to presentation, cutting-edge insights and discoveries can be clearly and faithfully communicated to students independent of those details; in fact, those insights and discoveries are precisely the ones that can drive a young student to want to learn the details. We rob science education of life when we focus solely on results and seek to train students to solve problems and recite facts without a commensurate emphasis on transporting them out beyond the stars.

Science is the greatest of all adventure stories, one that's been unfolding for thousands of years as we have sought to understand ourselves and our surroundings. Science needs to be taught to the young and communicated to the mature in a manner that captures this drama. We must embark on a cultural shift that places science in its rightful place alongside music, art and literature as an indispensable part of what makes life worth living.

It's the birthright of every child, it's a necessity for every adult, to look out on the world, as the soldier in Iraq did, and see that the wonder of the cosmos transcends everything that divides us.

Comments 1 - 27 of 27 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #187248 by Elles on June 1, 2008 at 4:12 pm

 avatar"But the reason for his writing was to tell me that in that hostile and lonely environment, a book I'd written had become a kind of lifeline. As the book is about science â€" one that traces physicists' search for nature's deepest laws â€" the soldier's letter might strike you as, well, odd."
Actually, when I read that I said "that's going to be me someday!" Minus the soldier part, perhaps...

Other Comments by Elles

2. Comment #187249 by mordacious1 on June 1, 2008 at 4:12 pm

Boy, this has been here for awhile without a post. What happened to all those first poster people? I agree that with science in your life, you can appreciate everything around you more. It does make life worth living. AND: no need for religion either.

Other Comments by mordacious1

3. Comment #187253 by CanadianRealist on June 1, 2008 at 4:39 pm

What's really sad is there are people who love their cell phones, iPods, personal computers, the internet and modern medicine (among other things) who will still ask the question "what has science ever done for me?"

When questioned, I've never heard one of them provide a good answer about where they think those things come from. Maybe I've just missed people pointing out which passages in their favourite holy book explain about the (full) electromagnetic spectrum, electronics, viruses, bacteria and so on.

Other Comments by CanadianRealist

4. Comment #187254 by rod-the-farmer on June 1, 2008 at 4:39 pm

 avatarAh, yes, the joy of science. Very well put. I wish I could be allowed to teach the subject, and hopefully pass on my passion & enthusiasm for it.

Other Comments by rod-the-farmer

5. Comment #187262 by ThoughtsonCommonToad on June 1, 2008 at 5:11 pm

 avatar
I wish I could be allowed to teach the subject, and hopefully pass on my passion & enthusiasm for it.
Allowed? Is the reason something shady or some more banal reason such as lacking a teaching degree. ;)

Other Comments by ThoughtsonCommonToad

6. Comment #187268 by RamziD on June 1, 2008 at 5:47 pm

I don't know if that soldier was reading "The Elegant Universe" or "Fabric of the Cosmos", but I know I was also inspired by Brian Greene's writings. He writes about physics and cosmology in such a beautiful way, it's hard not to be emotionally affected by it. Also, he makes it just simple enough that you don't have to be a scientist to understand his reviews on relativity, quantum theory, string theory, etc. Yet, not so dumbed-down that the meaning and importance of those concepts are diluted out.

Other Comments by RamziD

7. Comment #187273 by HourglassMemory on June 1, 2008 at 6:14 pm

I agree with Greene when he talks about schools not really being able to create that spark in kid's minds.
I always did have an interest in Science, which was influenced by my father always talking with me about very curious paradoxes and questions. And those things made me think.
I never really got into a discussion with him, but after just that little push (which wasn't a deliberate thing), my mind got into some sort of chain reaction of Curiosity and I could start in Biology and end up in Cosmology. And I just searched the information for myself. Thank god for the Internet!

School never really got into this in my mind. It was not responsible for his passion for Science at all.
And if it did I was probably focused on something else, which when you're a teenager, it isn't surprising … especially when the classes are boring.

School, to me always felt like it was making the learning of subjects an obligatory thing. As if it was a constant push. It wasn't ME having an interest. It was a "You just HAVE TO KNOW this, otherwise you won't have grades to have a good job" attitude. It's forced.
And these motivations are so Out there, so weird and wrong, if what you want is to get kids and teens fascinated by science, which in my experience, wasn't in the teachers minds at all.

It seems to me that schools jump right to the facts and to the teaching of formulas and whatnot Because that's what matters for the tests.
There's just something in the educational system and the way it's organized that I think could be very detrimental to a person's experience with Learning in general.

There's no spark at the beginning which can give those factoids meaning. That's why kids say "I don't need this". That's why schools are these awkward experiences.

I WAS one of those kids. Complaining about why I needed to know the names of the cell division phases and whatnot. That annoyed me back then. Because I was forcing that knowledge into my head and I just couldn't figure out a way to remember them. Then only way I found was mnemonics.
The only reason I kept it in my mind was because I HAD to remember it.

Science IS useless for our daily lives, in a way. You don't need to know about protons or the big bang or evolution to go to a nightclub or have a date or play a typical video game or have a typical chat in a chatroom because that's what kids do today to entertain themselves.

The kids who say "I don't need that" with an annoyed face, are the ones who don't know how enriching it can be to know those things, just for the heck of it. Because Science is knowing things for the heck of it. Technology is the fun stuff you can do with that knowledge. And having that knowledge just enriches your experience in this universe.
It's all what Brian Greene said.
And I don't think you could get away with it and make them fascinated, if you told them that science is all around them, and electricity is there in their computer and electrons are jumping around and transfering information ala morse code.
It could help. But it's something they have to find for themselves. IT's something beyond tests, and ...are kids thinking beyond tests? Is the schooling system telling them to think beyond the tests? Is the school talking with them as human beings, experiencing the unvierse?

This sense of just wanting to know more was something that I did not get from school. At all.
I can actually say that it was something that seriously started after I read Dawkins' "The God Delusion" and that was in 12th grade.
It was thanks to his books, and hundreds of other lectures freely available on the Internet that I REALLY understood Evolution.
Before that, evolution to me was just a subject in school. It was just little facts about genomes and moths during the industrial revolution.
There's just that Big something, behind scientific knowledge that, in my experience (and I bet in a lot of people's experience), wasn't given to me in school.
It was something that I developed by myself.
My God! If it wasn't for the Internet, and for information to be freely available. And Youtube. And Podcasts! And TED Lectures … man! I don't know where I would be.
(I wish the World Science Festival taped its lectures and discussion in the same way TED does, because I can't have access to those things.)
95 to 98% from the sources I learn something from is stuff NOT from my country of origin (Portugal). It's stuff from the Internet, in English.

I honestly do not remember any of my classes when we were giving Evolution. I only remember seeing a religious painting over the statement "some people believe the world was brought into existence through the will of a creator." And I remember shaking my head. That's all I remember of my Biology classes in 9th grade and 11th grade.

I think I don't remember because there was nothing special happening. I wasn't giving meaning to it.
People focus a lot on, "oooh you have to get a job, get into university."
Learning to acquire knowledge for the sake of it is really not the sort of stuff I encountered in my experiences in school.

And it saddens me that tons of kids do not have that father or mother or SOMEONE who makes them think about the universe and makes them want to know stuff about it.

Other Comments by HourglassMemory

8. Comment #187298 by Cthulance on June 1, 2008 at 8:48 pm

 avatarThis article reminds me of my own father, and how we watched Cosmos together on PBS back in its first run on television. We'd watch it together and then stay up into the wee hours of the night excitedly discussing what we'd seen. We speculated endlessly.

This truly saved me from all the mindkilling garbage I was "learning" in school at the time.

Then my father rediscovered our mutual birth religion (Mormonism) and now refuses to discuss Cosmos at all (he refers to Carl Sagan as "that damn atheist" disparagingly and with disgust).

Yet even though my father lost that spark, back in those days he ignited a spark in me. I'm grateful to my dad for being who he was then and for igniting such a lasting interest in and appreciation of science within me.

Other Comments by Cthulance

9. Comment #187300 by rod-the-farmer on June 1, 2008 at 8:53 pm

 avatarRe Comment #187262 by ThoughtsonCommonToad
I not only lack a teaching degree, I lack ANY degree. I went right to work, after flunking out of military college. Never had to study too hard in high school, so was not prepared for the enormous workload there. I have kept a life-long interest in science, and would love to teach it, or history, but in Ontario Canada you have to be certified (i.e. a degree) to be even a substitute teacher. I am too old now to go back and spend two years minimum to get one, as most teachers my age have already retired. I doubt I could ever get a job teaching science. Yet I would probably do it for free.

It's funny, but the last job I had, I was THE world expert at, yet my boss & I agreed I would not qualify for it if I applied for it, based on my lack of a degree. Too bad there are a lot of dumb people out there with degrees, and a lot of very capable ones without them.

Other Comments by rod-the-farmer

10. Comment #187308 by kram50 on June 1, 2008 at 9:50 pm

".....the chance to make students sit up in their chairs and say "wow that's science?"


I was only half way through this article when I sat up in my chair and said,"wow".
Very well said Mr. Greene!!

I'm going to keep this one in my pocket....and I won't hesitate to present this to some of my deluded co-workers.

Ya Ya,I know what they will say,..."It's all part of gadds divine plan...bla..bla..bla.

Oh well, every little bit helps...right?

Other Comments by kram50

11. Comment #187316 by Raiko on June 1, 2008 at 11:02 pm

 avatar♥ This makes me think of Carl Sagan and of why I love going to the lab every morning.

It makes me happy. :)

Other Comments by Raiko

12. Comment #187317 by mada2002 on June 1, 2008 at 11:03 pm

 avatarIt is a shame that more people don't appreciate science for the mind-altering substance that it is.(or perhaps thats why they don't appreciate it?) I was fortunate enough to have several science teachers through middle and high school that revealed the greatness of science and the explanations for the world around us. Its very true though that without the proper introduction to science it can seem very cold and distant when focusing on the technical side. Its just like music, I wouldn't have stuck with it if they wouldn't have let me play the fun stuff. Hooray Science! And Hooray for Mr. Strand and Ms. Berglund!

Other Comments by mada2002

13. Comment #187348 by Factofevolution on June 2, 2008 at 2:50 am

What a great piece of writing. If you haven't read Greene's "The Elegant Universe" or "The Fabric of the Cosmos" I highly recomend them. Both books instill the deep sense of wonder and awe about quantum physics that Dawkins' "The Ancestor's Tale" instills about Evolution. The ideas really come to life in a way that no supernatural explaination ever could for me. And they are all the more beautiful for their utter lack of the supernatural.

I can also recomend Susan Jacoby's "The Age of American Unreason" for a more in depth look at the deploreable state of education in the US. Its really sad. Dangerous? Yes. Disgusting? Of course. But also profoundly sad.

Other Comments by Factofevolution

14. Comment #187350 by GBile on June 2, 2008 at 2:55 am

 avatarA curious (part of a) sentence in the article:

'so-called dark matter and energy, which researchers are now vigorously trying to divine.'

This would certainly get them the Templeton price if they succeeded.

Other Comments by GBile

15. Comment #187368 by bamboospitfire on June 2, 2008 at 4:14 am

 avatarWhilst I did enjoy studying chemistry at school and did reasonably well, the subject never really engaged me. Knowing what I have learned over the past year about the creation of elements within the cores of stars has given me a new appreciation of chemistry that I wish I had had when I was at school. I have explained to a few people the basics of nuclear fusion and how atoms are spread through the universe by supernovae, ultimately to coalesce into planets around new stars, potentially resulting in life. It has always come as a complete surprise to those people that this is how it all happens, but a fascinating surprise nonetheless. I really do not understand why chemistry teachers do not explain this process to their pupils on day one. If children realise that they are experimenting with the relationships between elements and the compounds of those elements which were necessarily produced in the cores of supermassive stars, they will understand that they are dealing with something greater than the contents of a test-tube. In my view, children should be told that whilst they may be studying a subject at an elementary level, the topics they are exploring form part of a much larger whole. That applies to all scientific and mathematical pursuits. Children tend to dismiss subjects which they cannot relate to their everyday lives. If they can be helped to understand how science is fundamental to existence and how the processes, relationships and equations they are studying relate to the way the universe works, perhaps that would change.

Other Comments by bamboospitfire

16. Comment #187372 by Peribolos on June 2, 2008 at 4:36 am

 avatarI think that one of the great losses to science teaching in recent years is the diminishing role of practicals. Even worse, for reasons of cost and presumably health and safety, those practicals that do remain have become hideously boring. I remember my GCSE biology practical involved counting the number of bubbles duckweed produced in a minute. No wonder I didn't take any science subjects to A-level.

Other Comments by Peribolos

17. Comment #187397 by sane1 on June 2, 2008 at 5:10 am

 avatarBriane Greene's books are awesome if you like cosmology and astrophysics. This article isn't particularly persuasive or iomaginative though.

Other Comments by sane1

18. Comment #187414 by scotriani on June 2, 2008 at 5:54 am

If only my high school science teachers were like this. I don't think I know a high school student that has read the likes of Brian Green, let alone Dawkins.

Imagine if they have.

Other Comments by scotriani

19. Comment #187465 by SteveO on June 2, 2008 at 7:22 am

 avatarBelieve it or not one of the best science teachers I've had was my Trade Electrical teacher, probably because he had to teach electromagnetic theory to people who wouldn't normally be interested in it.

Other Comments by SteveO

20. Comment #187466 by Neil Schipper on June 2, 2008 at 7:23 am

Interesting comments (and dare I say, for a change?). I feel a lot of the pain people are expressing here. We are in the dark ages when it comes to science education. Putting aside the glories of modern cosmology and evolutionary biology, I shudder to think what percent of high school grads (or classroom teachers) can just describe -- not with equations or analysis, but just in a hand-waving way -- which observations led to Copernicus getting beyond Ptolemy.

The hiring of science teachers should be more like the way bands choose new players and & sports teams choose players: what you show you can do should matter, not degrees.

Other Comments by Neil Schipper

21. Comment #187649 by Border Collie on June 2, 2008 at 12:22 pm

I was one of those kids ... studying astronomy at 5 or 6, fascinated with the natural world around me. Then I started public school in Texas. And, with a fundamentalist mother, that bright, curious child died. Good news is ... fifty years later, I'm back on track. Thanks everyone on this site!

Other Comments by Border Collie

22. Comment #187857 by Zaphod on June 2, 2008 at 9:52 pm

 avatarThe Joy of Science.

I feel this in every book, article and talk that Brian gives.

He has a spark of Carl Sagan in him me thinks.

:-D

Other Comments by Zaphod

23. Comment #188131 by Sh!fty on June 3, 2008 at 8:50 am

 avatarI translated this article to spanish if anyone is interested or knows someone who would benefit from it.

http://sinpensarla.blogspot.com/2008/06/pon-un-poco-de-ciencia-en-tu-vida.html

Other Comments by Sh!fty

24. Comment #188203 by King of NH on June 3, 2008 at 10:45 am

 avatarRod-the-Farmer,
You're never too old to go back to school. I'm rather young (I tell myself) but still a good decade behind. But shortly after returning to school at a community college, I became a tutor. I got paid a nice hourly wage to share my passion for academics and helped to send struggling students (some older, some drop-outs, some mild learning disabled) to 4 year colleges. Even if you're just auditing courses (much cheaper) you could probably offer to tutor students and share the love of science.

As a tutor, I always found it important to emphasize the beauty of the 'system'. In English, for instance; I would explain how every word of our language has a history behind it. We say 'cow' for the animal and 'beef' for the meat because of the Norman invasion of England. Even the grammar of English has been shaped by historical events, some known, some yet to be discovered. Excitement is key to learning.

Other Comments by King of NH

25. Comment #188238 by darwinphish on June 3, 2008 at 11:59 am

It's sad how few people can really experience the wonder in everyday life as shown by science... in my own attempt to increase knowledge and wonderment, I recently started a blog about the origin of life.
http://ontheorigins.blogspot.com/. If you're interested in the scientific perspectives on the origin of life, check it out.

Other Comments by darwinphish

26. Comment #188264 by sent2null on June 3, 2008 at 2:35 pm

 avatarI love telling people science facts that they probably never thought about or never knew just see their reaction and spark a discussion different from the mundane topics of entertainment (which I am ashamed to say I know entirely too much about), sport(which I am proud to say I don't know much about) or politics (in which I've grown entirely sick of seeing the regurgitation of lies that attends each political cycle).

I recently wrote a post about the wonder that science has inspired in me and what I have done to try and allow the spreading of truth to be an easier task at my blog.

http://sent2null.blogspot.com

Other Comments by sent2null

27. Comment #192590 by nullsession on June 13, 2008 at 1:32 pm

I am fortunate enough to teach astronomy. I have some motivated students, but many take the class just to get a science credit. I try to emphasize the importance of the scientific method and how science can influence how they think of the world around them. We get to talk about pseudoscience and skepticism and evolution and of course the many amazing things we now see and know about the universe. A key distinction I hope they walk away with is how we came to know what we know over centuries of effort an application of the scientific method (and some really brilliant guys along the way!)

I like to think of teaching astronomy as a way to get them to look more critically and rationally at the world, but also to be more amazed by how truly mind-blowing this universe is. Brian Greene's work is inspiring to professors too! We even end the course with a discussion of relativity, string theory and some of his "Elegant Universe" series on DVD.

Other Comments by nullsession
Reload Comments | Back to Top

Comment Entry: Please Login

Register a new account

Username:

Password: