Leader
Science, in a Broad and a Narrow Sense
What is science? At least it means universities, researchers,
findings, publications, inventions, and
Nobel prizes. On the other hand, it is something
much more broad-ranging, something that relates
to culture and general courses of action.
When it is understood in a broad sense, scientific culture can
mean believing in the idea that diverse and well-justified points of
view would generally prevail over first impressions and preconceptions.
That shades of grey contain more than black and white. That
it is possible to discover and rectify even tenacious errors. That it is
worth listening longer to people who see many sides to things than to
people who only look at things from one angle.
Science, broadly understood, maintains public discussions at a high
level and ensures that policy making and, for instance, product development
are based on the best available knowledge.
Science, however, is easier to measure narrowly than broadly.
National and international indicators emphasize those “products” of
science that can be calculated as units and evaluate universities as institutions
that produce them.
Both individual researchers and universities need courage and insightfulness
so as not to accept the order that is given between the
lines: create only things that, in the short run, produce the most
money or visibility that also has monetary value.
Science in a broad sense does not have too many
proponents, and words that are associated with it,
like “discipline” in some of its senses may even sound
old-fashioned. On the other hand, science in its broad
sense may be taken for granted. “Rising educational
levels”, with all their consequences related to economic
success and to the quality of policy making,
have been a part of every recent government programme.
At the latest during the recent years, however, it
has become evident that the continuous rise of the
quality of societal discussion or the quality of policy
making certainly does not happen automatically.
In the practice of science making, the broad senses
of science are still understood quite well. An individual
group of specialists or top researchers cannot
create an entire culture based on knowledge. It requires
a variety of competences, even students. Science
policy controversies — the big against the small,
or researcher-teachers against the “other staff” — are
frequently absent when people who are seen to belong
to these groups really meet.
But science always has at least a communicational
problem. Those who work with it, from all walks of
science, feel that they are lacking in prospects and
that their competence is not acknowledged. Politicians
and economic life complain that the resources
allocated for science do not produce the results they
had hoped for. It becomes increasingly difficult to defend
science not just as a producer of individual products
but also in its broader senses.
University people are not simply concerned about
the government cuts on education and research because
of their own jobs. When an entire generation
seems to be at risk to be blocked on its way to becoming
professionals of scientific culture due to lack of
money, there is serious cause for concern that belief
in science in a broad sense is now officially gone.
We can, however, do more than just wish it were not
so. The unions that publish this journal can advocate
science across the boundaries of individual occupational
groups, schools of thought, disciplines or
universities. This issue of Acatiimi presents the Researcher
of the Year 2015. Since 1997, the Union for
University Teachers and Researchers in Finland has
given this prize to people who advance and promote
science in a broad sense.
Petri Koikkalainen
Chair, The Finnish Union of
University Researchers and
Teachers
- Painetussa lehdessä sivu 38
|