Are we rational?

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?”