Every scientific
enquiry needs an unbiased observation system to decipher the real
meaning or understand the principles behind any phenomenon. This is
the basis of science, which has its roots in rationalism. Every
concept/ idea in science is first hypothesized, tested upon and then
proved. We also see proved ideas challenged at later date. This is
hence an iterative process. After these iterations, finally when we
call the proven facts as laws, which lay foundation for the further
works to be carried out, in the form of their applications. Although
this is true in disciplines like physics and chemistry, we see very
few laws in the field of biology. Even if the possibilities are not
infinite, the decision making system becomes more complex with higher
degrees of organization in the living world. Its one of the toughest
challenges to deduce/ guess the final outcome of any process in the
biological systems. Moreover these systems are highly influenced by
the environment. Slightest changes in the extracellular concentration
of few ions and/or biomolecules can even determine the fate of the
cell (as observed in stem cells). While observing and analysing such
complex processes we cannot have any biases or preconceived notions.
These notions, if present can affect the conclusions derived from
such experiments.
Probing into human
psychology lets us see the deepest corners of human thought process.
There is a very peculiar property which we possess. We tend to
observe things in-line with their beliefs. We sometimes go to an
extent that we ignore outliers, which might be of greater
significance in biology, since we observe exceptions in biological
experiments more frequently as compared to other fields. When it
comes to scientific observations, in most of the cases its either we
ourselves or the technologies developed by us are the observation
systems. But if our minds in reality inherit the properties I
mentioned here, that this tendency of humans is deleterious for the
growth of science. Rather it can take us away from the actual truth
and make us follow the ideologies of few people who are leading/
directing the process of development of science.
Further, one of the
most prominent weakness, among the many that we possess, is fear of
failure. This was highlighted nicely in a book named Crimes,
Criminals & Cops,
written by Ex-deputy Commissioner of Police, Mr. R. S. Kulkarni.
He is well known for his expertise in criminology. In this book he
shares five famous and successful criminal investigations carried
out by his team. While describing the first case, he states that
solving criminal cases is much like answering scientific enquiries.
Further he mentions about times when police personnel tend to catch
the suspect which appears to be guilty and/ or one, who can be
charged with certain available evidences. This system of conviction
(seems to work almost every time but) needs rechecking the facts and
restating and proving the evidences to be more concrete and fact
based, rather than just circumstantial. He has also stated, that due
to time, media, failure and related pressures we follow the practices
which need not search for the truth, but fit the scenario into
available framework of observations (evidences). This insight into
human psychology is really interesting learn. Having said all this, I
really wish to answer to a very simple and basic question about human
brain, “How much influence does our brain/ mind have on the
observations we make?”
