In talk.origins I read this message from

A farewell -- and a recommendation
http://www.boston.com/news/science/articles/2003/12/09/a_farewell____and_a_recommendation/

By Chet Raymo, 12/9/2003

I had so much hope for this post. That will teach me to assume
too much from a subject line.

[snip]

In talk.origins I read this message from

A farewell -- and a recommendation
http://www.boston.com/news/science/articles/2003/12/09/a_farewell____and_a_recommendation/

By Chet Raymo, 12/9/2003

I had so much hope for this post. That will teach me to assume
too much from a subject line.

[snip]

On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 13:32:54 +0000 (UTC),

A farewell -- and a recommendation
http://www.boston.com/news/science/articles/2003/12/09/a_farewell____and_a_recommendation/

SCIENCE MUSINGS
A farewell -- and a recommendation

By Chet Raymo, 12/9/2003

Several weeks ago, The New York Times asked in the headline of its
Tuesday science section, "Does Science Matter?", then spent 16 pages
suggesting an answer: Indeed it does, more than ever.

But the Times also noted that this conclusion is not necessarily that of
the American public. The prestige of scientists is declining. Religious
fundamentalism and belief in the paranormal is on the rise. Reflecting
this national mood, the government provides fewer dollars for scientific
research.

Apparently people want pat answers to the big questions of life, and
science doesn't provide them. Nor can it. The driving force of science
is curiosity about the unknown. Science thrives on mystery.

The 20th century was America's century not least because of the
preeminence of American science. For this same reason, the 21st century
might belong to Asia, and especially China, as America retreats into
dogma and superstition.

What can be done? Probably nothing. If people want pat answers, they
will have them.

For 20 years, I have shared in this column my admiration for those men
and women of past and present who hold their knowledge of the world
against the refining fire of empirical experience. They are part of a
glorious transcultural intellectual tradition that has led us into the
heart of living cells and to the distant galaxies.

Of course, science also can slip into smug self-centeredness. Scientists
are not immune to the cozy security of dogma. But of all the ways humans
have devised to obtain reliable public knowledge of the world, it is my
conviction that science is the least susceptible to accidents of birth,
personal prejudice, the coercions of authority, and the straitjackets of
tradition.

Yet science alone is an incomplete basis for a life. We need our Jane
Austens, Igor Stravinskys and Albert Schweitzers as much as our Charles
Darwins, Marie Curies and Albert Einsteins. What poets, artists, saints
and scientists share is a capacity to be astonished.

This column is the last of Science Musings. It has been a long, joyous
ride, not least because of the always thoughtful responses of readers.
Your willingness to share your knowledge and life experiences has been
an important part of my education, and I am grateful to you.

As a parting token of my gratitude, let me share with you my pleasure in
a book I have just finished reading: "For the Love of Insects," by
Thomas Eisner (Harvard University Press, 2003).

Eisner is professor of chemical ecology at Cornell University, and one
of America's preeminent entomologists. He has spent a lifetime figuring
out the chemical language of insects. He has published hundreds of
scientific papers. His new book is a personal memoir of a lifetime in
science, engagingly written and stunningly illustrated with photographs
of insects doing astonishing things.

Eisner's bugs squirt, secrete, ooze, defecate, and regurgitate a whole
vocabulary of chemicals, to mark, repel, attract, and entangle. Eisner
"listens" and "translates" this chemical language with experiments that
are enchanting in their simplicity.

What makes Eisner a world-class entomologist is not access to
million-dollar scientific instruments, but a mind that never stops
asking "Why?" And this within a life that is filled with the joys of
family, travel, music, literature.

There is no danger of running out of mysteries. As Eisner points out,
the 1.5 million species of organic life that have so far been described
by science are only a fraction of the number that exist. Most creatures
on this planet await discovery, and even the most familiar have secrets
to reveal.

There are no great philosophical conclusions in Eisner's book, no pat
answers to the big questions of life; just one man's unremitting
curiosity about the natural world.

One comes away from "For the Love of Insects" with a suspicion that
unremitting curiosity in the face of inexhaustible mystery might just be
an answer to the biggest question of all: What makes a human life worth
living?
© Copyright 2003 Globe Newspaper Company.



Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
and
SCAMPERMEISTER!"

When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert

alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}