How could science be different? The question reverberates an intent to get rid of an innate tendency to be contented with what science has deciphered so far about the nature. It invites us to mend the pathways that science has taken so far. Before venturing for a prescriptive journey on how science could be different for societal betterment, it is essential to express the panorama of science by drawing contours of basic sciences, and their relatedness with engineering, technology, and social sciences. Science can be changed for making a difference through (i) redefining its goals (ii) reconnecting with past wisdom, (iii) expanding sites of excellence, (iv) overcoming barriers to learning science, (v) thinning barriers within basic sciences, (vi) diminishing barriers between science and social science, and (vii) overcoming foundational threat to basic sciences. There is enough scope for betterment of science. This may be done through advancement of basic sciences in developing regions for their socioeconomic development. We must aim for synchronization of basic sciences, engineering, and technology, inducting inter-disciplinary approach, and adopting a more holistic approach to amplify the effectiveness of science. We must reinstate philosophers and philosophical approaches back to business for the continuous consolidation of knowledge slices. The knowledge gaps will always be there or emerge at a finer scale as there are always limits to what extent science, religion, and philosophy can decipher about reality. Hence, unknowns, mysterious, and not-fully-answered questions need to be reinstated as a critical feature of nature to reflect upon.
Brajesh Mishra
Discuss on Forums
View All