Science is what scientists do, and therefore science becomes what we know about the universe. Science asks questions about the universe, starting with our world. Such as, 'What is the world made of?' And, 'How does it work?' So science is about collecting knowledge about the world, and that often means developing ways of investigating it. Scientists increase our knowledge by finding ways of identifying and measuring what the 'stuff' of the world actually is and how it behaves- how it works- and they do a lot of this by means of experiments. Such experiments often become possible when new apparatus is invented to carry out a particular investigation. By 'stuff', I mean matter, and chemicals, and living things. The building of scientific knowledge and understanding has been very challenging, and also very successful. Yet while we now know a lot, there is still a lot to find out. The school curriculum can give the impression that scientists know (nearly?) everything. That is an unfortunate view to take: there is so much we don't know as science only asks certain kinds of questions anyway. Some people might get the impression that the questions that scientists ask are the only questions that really matter for future progress and human thriving. That would also be very unfortunate.
Technology takes scientific knowledge and applies it to doing useful things and changing the world. That means that someone decides that they want to try to develop a product or process, and then they apply the scientific knowledge that they have at that time to making this happen. But you can see, right away, that the case must be made that such a plan is a good idea. Or that there are conditions and limits that must be applied in carrying out such a technological development. Such questions are not so much questions of science or technology, but of ethics and law. We could, but should we? Is this idea a good idea? What are the 'rights and wrongs' to be aware of in this situation? What options do we have, and what would make for the greater good?
Science has discovered that everything is made of atoms, and then that understanding led to the technology that made it possible for us to split some of those atoms. Now we have nuclear power and nuclear bombs. Science has discovered the cells that are joined to make new human beings, and now we can control and manipulate the cells that make the embryos of new human beings. At all levels of existence, through our technologies, we can now give life, change it, and take it away. 'Just because we can does not mean that we should.'
So science and technology, and the activities of scientists and technologists, must all be seen in the wider context of ethics and morals that we share in our communities. We have to decide what we value, which is not at all a scientific question. Humans across the world continue to hold somewhat different values and take different views about what is important to them: what is meaning-ful. It may be true that we hold many values in common, but even if we do, we do not share the same worldview. Some say, when faced with the power of science and technology, that we should resist the urge to change things. Others embrace big ideas for progress and transformation of the world, exploiting the potential of science and technology. These views are tied up with our ideas about how we make our economies work. What jobs shall we do? How do we feed everyone? Is it important to make money? What sort of world are we making for ourselves, and is it fair?
And fundamentally, what really matters? Is this world really our world, to do with as we please, or are there any ultimate concerns beyond the limited view of science and technology? Some say that the sum of reality is only what science and technology reveal to us, while others insist that there are aspects to reality that Science cannot know about. The discipline of Science deliberately excludes knowing about or investigating what lies beyond the reach of our senses and measuring equipment. That is not a criticism of Science, simply a recognition that it is a limited way of knowing about what there is. Questions of human personhood, what it is to be Human, questions of meaning and value, or of super-Nature (the supernatural) including inquiries into the existence and nature of God are all quite simply beyond the reach of Science, by definition.
Good teaching, therefore, must engage with the question, 'What is Science?' and must very much engage with the subsequent questions that lie beyond Science. When does Science become Technology; what is applied science, and how should all that engage with ethics and morals and various religiously informed views of the cosmos?
1. https://www.pexels.com/photo/woman-working-in-laboratory-3861457/
