The Emergence of Scientific Thought

In the mid-1600s, René Descartes famously declared, “I think, therefore I am,” positing that a rational world governed by logic was attainable. He believed that clear thinking could resolve the problems we face.

However, Descartes' approach faced limitations. Influential thinkers like John Locke and David Hume adopted a more empirical stance, asserting that genuine understanding of our surroundings is derived from experience, despite its imperfections. This shift towards experiential knowledge paved the way for the concept of expertise. As the Renaissance and Enlightenment transitioned into modernity, knowledge became increasingly specialized. It was no longer sufficient to engage in abstract reasoning; knowledge production began to be viewed as a scientific process that involves hypothesis testing through experimentation.

This transition marked a pivotal moment, as discussions about abstract concepts—such as how many angels can dance on the head of a pin—gave way to empirical validation. To assert a theory, one must demonstrate its applicability in the real world, allowing others to verify the evidence and arrive at similar conclusions.

The Invisible Soccer Ball

Science often unfolds in unpredictable ways, characterized by serendipitous discoveries and unexpected insights. In his book, The God Particle, Nobel laureate Leon Lederman employs a metaphor about an alien species observing a soccer match to illustrate the nature of scientific inquiry.

These aliens, although similar to humans, cannot perceive black and white patterns. As a result, if they were to attend a soccer game, they would struggle to comprehend the players' actions. Their theories and conjectures would be fruitless, as they would be unable to make accurate predictions. Eventually, one might observe a bulge in the goal net just as the crowd erupts in cheers and hypothesize about an unseen ball. Through continued observation, they could test this hypothesis, gathering evidence despite never seeing the ball itself.

Lederman’s metaphor underscores that science transcends common sense. It grapples with phenomena that we cannot directly observe but that nonetheless have tangible impacts on our world. Today, we inhabit a realm of abstract realities, where unconventional theories—like relativity—lead to groundbreaking technologies such as microprocessors and the Internet.

Understanding Cargo Cult Science

Given that much of scientific inquiry concerns the imperceptible, metaphors such as Lederman’s alien story help us grasp complex concepts. The allure of science lies in exploring imaginative ideas and testing their validity against reality.

However, this imaginative approach can also lead to misleading conclusions when unqualified individuals engage in speculation without empirical validation. Take, for instance, the anti-vaccine movement, which lacks scientific backing yet has gained traction, resulting in the resurgence of diseases that were once on the brink of extinction. Cloaked in scientific rhetoric, the assertion that vaccines cause harm can appear convincingly legitimate.

Physicist Richard Feynman coined the term "cargo cult science," referencing peculiar practices on some South Pacific islands where tribes mimic technological processes in hopes of attracting beneficial cargo. True science is not defined by impressive jargon or lab coats but by adherence to established methodologies, rigorous observation, and peer evaluation. In contrast, pundits often disregard these principles, relying solely on personal opinions.

The Essential Role of Science

Undeniably, science has been the cornerstone of modern civilization. It is the bedrock of technology, which in turn fosters economic prosperity. From a pragmatic perspective, science is crucial for societal advancement.

Beyond economic implications, science represents the pursuit of truth. In essence, it involves formulating testable propositions to explore possibilities. This differentiates scientific theories—like Darwin's natural selection and the Big Bang—from mere conjecture. The latter relies on faith rather than empirical validation.

Consider Marco Rubio's comments in a GQ interview regarding the universe's age: “I think the age of the universe has zero to do with how our economy is going to grow. I’m not a scientist. I don’t think I’m qualified to answer a question like that. At the end of the day, I think there are multiple theories out there on how the universe was created and I think this is a country where people should have the opportunity to teach them all.”

Yet, the Big Bang theory is not merely speculative; it is the culmination of numerous theories—including general relativity and quantum mechanics—backed by extensive observational data. Students in physics classes study the Big Bang not to shape their beliefs, but to understand its foundational significance to scientific inquiry.

These concepts permeate our daily lives. We rely on relativity for GPS accuracy and harness quantum mechanics for technology like lasers and microprocessors that power everyday devices. The scientific principles underpinning the Big Bang are integral to the functioning of our modern economy.

Rejecting scientific inquiry leads us to a form of mysticism. When we allow personal beliefs to dictate our understanding of truth, we risk descending a precarious path where truth becomes subjective.

Greg Satell is an internationally recognized speaker, consultant, and author of Cascades: How to Create a Movement that Drives Transformational Change. His previous work, Mapping Innovation, was acknowledged as one of the best business books of 2017. To learn more about Greg, visit his website, GregSatell.com, and follow him on Twitter @DigitalTonto.