It is a strange world, indeed, where one can't even trust the colour of fruit!
According to an article in The Sciences, a white egg is actually blue and an orange is actually green when subjected to normal blue sunlight. The scientific explanation for this phenomenon is that colour is actually reflected light, even though we tend to think of it as an innate part of an object. The reason we don't see colours as they truly are is because our minds compensate for the change, telling us what we believe the colours should be rather than what they actually are.
This is, of course, shocking news to those of us who thought we understood the universe pretty well. How can we know what's what if we can't trust our senses to give us accurate information about the simplest things like colour? To explore this question, I spoke to a conservative physicist, a liberal philosopher and a bum I found on the street. To begin with, I asked if the magazine article was essentially correct.
The physicist said, "Yes. From the wavelength of light which is reflected off objects, we can determine their true colours without relying on our senses." The philosopher said, "Well, this may be true in a physical sense. But, since we only know the universe by what our mind tells us about it, this so-called 'objective' knowledge of the universe means very little." The bum said, "What was the question?"
Okay, then. Given the deficiencies of human sensory organs, and the limitations of the human mind in compensating for them, is it possible to truly know the universe? The physicist said, "Of course. In the first place, we've created incredibly sophisticated machinery to measure what we physically cannot. In the second place, we continue to construct theoretical models of the way things work which, although they may never be perfect, help us understand the true nature of things." The philosopher said, "Understand the universe? We don't even understand consciousness, our emotions...instinct...the way much of the body works! Sure, the body of knowledge accumulated by Western civilization is massive; but, without some sort of moral grounding, it has no meaning." The bum said, "Understand the universe? I don't even understand flush toilets!"
Let's follow this reasoning for a moment: is it important that we understand the universe? Might we be better off exploring spiritual and moral matters? The physicist said, "Of course it's important to understand the universe! Through the application of our scientific knowledge we have the ability to all but eliminate disease, starvation...to vastly improve the quality of life for every human being on the planet!" The philosopher said, "Sure, we can do all of those worthwhile things. But, so far, we haven't. Why not? Because we haven't developed an adequate moral philosophy to help us determine how best to apply our knowledge. And, even as we struggle with the technologies we have today, new technologies are being developed, with their own moral dimensions." The bum said, "You can't eat knowledge."
Well, now, that's an interesting point. What kind of morality should we develop to best help us cope with constantly changing technology? The physicist said, "That's not really my concern. I'm interested in exploring the nature of the universe. What society decides to do with the knowledge is up to it." The philosopher said, "What a ridiculous cop-out! Scientific research must be based on some form of humanitarian philosophy - if it isn't, it can be used to create the worst atrocities! The only way to deal with rapid change is to decide that, wherever research leads, it will only be used for the good of humanity." The bum said, "Is this going to take much longer? I told the Missus I would meet her on the corner at three o'clock."
Not much longer. Let's change the direction of the discussion a bit and - The physicist interrupted, "Wait a minute. You can't just blame all atrocities on scientists like that. The were all developed as social policy by civilians!" Interesting point. Thank you. But, to continue with - The philosopher argued, "Sure, but the research had to be conducted by scientists, and they probably had the same disinterested attitude you claim to have. Scientists have a moral obligation to oversee the consequences of their work!" The bum added, "Don't neither of you come near me. I have a orange...I mean, a green belt in karate!"
Gentlemen, please! We have seen that our senses cannot always be trusted. One potential consequence is that those who do understand science will develop a technological elite; that, in fact, a whole new ruling class will develop. The physicist smoldered, "Who decided what is right and wrong, anyway? Politicians? They're not interested in the pursuit of knowledge; they're only interested in the pursuit of votes! Besides, how can we possibly foresee all of the future applications of our present discoveries? Should we halt all research to conduct studies of where it will lead?" The philosopher retorted, "Look, not knowing all the possible ramifications of an action is no excuse for not taking a moral stand. In answer to your question, I think there already is a technological elite, which grows with each new discovery, and I have serious reservations about it..." The bum said, "I have a black and white television set, but it doesn't work..."
The philosopher and the physicist lunged at each other and started rolling around on the floor. The bum started eating roses out of a vase. There is an important lesson here for all of us...
