Spring 1997

People are inherently scientific. It is time for us to recall our scientific roots and participate in decision-making that will define science and technology as we approach the future.

   We are all born scientists. As children, we begin to question the nature of the world in which we live: we ask our elders why the sun shines and why the stars twinkle, why we sometimes see rainbows, why plants are green, why birds fly and fish swim. Upon receiving an answer to any such question, we sometimes walk away content with the explanation we have heard but occasionally are dissatisfied, feeling that the response was illogical or incomplete. In either case, the question-answer cycle is far from over: inevitably new questions arise in our minds and we persevere until we find the answers we seek. Trivial as these questions may be--certainly many of them are not fundamental to personal survival--our young minds crave explanations of these phenomena. It’s as if something inside of us cannot rest until the acquisition of a little piece of scientific knowledge satiates our brains.

   Growing older, our questions about our surroundings become more mature and far reaching yet they continue to reflect our will to know about the world. We develop the desire to understand the origins, history, and future of the universe and life within it. Such interests drive us to make sense of the objects and phenomena that occur in the cosmos on both the largest and smallest of spatial and temporal scales. Indeed, it would prove almost inhuman to not wonder what sets people apart from other organisms, whether life exists or has existed elsewhere in the universe, how the universe began, and, perhaps on a more philosophical level, why it all exists. All the while, we draw upon scientific reasoning and evidence to help support whatever position we choose to take on any of these questions.

   So humanity possesses a perpetual inquisitiveness about matters intrinsically scientific; why then, I wonder, do so many people deny that they have the ability to think scientifically or to intelligently follow science-related issues? Such people tend to claim they can’t or don’t “do” science. But what does it mean to “do” science? Granted, when it comes to making career decisions most people do not choose to make science their life pursuit. Scientific skills, however, do not necessarily come strictly with higher education or work in the natural sciences. People fail to realize that thinking scientifically doesn’t just amount to knowing lots of formulas and principles and concepts; it largely involves knowing how to formulate a question and then applying the critical thinking needed to find an answer—the same kind of process we use when we contemplate our universe. Take, for example, the case of William Burns, a scholar featured in this issue of SciTech for his work on decoding an ancient Inca writing system. With no professional training in anthropology, he applied his self-taught knowledge of Quechua and Inca history to some symbols in an ancient manuscript in order to make some conclusions about what he saw. Although we cannot be sure if his system is correct, no one can argue that he did not use scientific methods to arrive at his findings. He simply employed logical thought and made inferences based on astute observations. Taking these steps hardly required specialized training. Whether individuals bear the occupational title of scientist or not, we are all inherently scientific and it is vital that we are constantly aware of our abilities to think logically and scientifically. In this issue of SciTech , we present articles on topics ranging from the effects of protease inhibitors on AIDS to the ethics of granting corporate access to individuals’ genetic information. While one can understand these articles without a high level of technical training, full comprehension of each requires a critical exploration of the issue and its effects on everyday life. Only when we feel confident in our abilities to dismantle and approach a scientific problem can we appropriately understand and form opinions about scientific matters that directly touch people’s lives. As science continues to shape our world in positive and negative ways, it proves more and more crucial for every one of us to make contact with our “scientist-selves” and invoke our innate concern about our surroundings. By applying reasonable and discriminating thought to the science-related issues we encounter daily, we hold the reins on social decisions regarding health care, the environment, space exploration, energy sources, and nuclear physics, to name just a few. There is simply no reason to leave choices in science to a delegated few; it is time that we all recall with fondness and confidence our scientific roots and involve ourselves in the decisions that will define the path science and technology take in the future.

Amy Paige Snyder '98
Editor in chief