Why is science so pathetic in our society?

Science has become confined to the locked rooms in our higher educational institutions. Science scholars do their research inside locked rooms and do not bother themselves to present it. Every year, they publish numerous research papers in various academic journals but do not present any idea of their research at any scientific seminar. Consequently, science has become a subject of isolation.

Science is a discipline of society and works as a social institution. Prof. John Ziman writes in his book: Introduction to Science studies (publication by Cambridge university) that: Science emerged as a social institution and that scientific knowledge should be applied directly or indirectly to the problem-solving process. (sect:1.2, pg#03) In the sociological aspect of science, he described the whole process of the evolution of science by a profound diagram (fig:01). In that stream, he connected scientific research with industry. However, middle interventions also exist. Interested readers can read his masterpiece.

In the light of human experience, I observe multidimensional causes for this academic flaw. As follows;

Lack of communication in scientific institutes is making science pathetic. We can hardly find scientific seminars for its promotion. Pupils do not engage themselves in scientific discussion. They do not take part in tutorials or other science-promoting activities. Hence, scientific knowledge is locked in the rooms of our educational bosses.

In this information age, communication of knowledge would not be exalted. Yuval Noah Harari writes in his book while explaining dataism; In the 21st century, the flow of data will determine the healthy life span of a nation. Israel is a country of just nine million people and invests the wealth of its annual GDP in the military business, and the amount is comparable to the military budget (per annum) spent by Pakistan. Then, what is the secret to its progress? It is the world’s top investor in the domain of research and development. The other secret weapon is the old tradition of its natives that transfer the golden spoon of innovative knowledge from generation to generation.

Teaching scientific disciplines without their esthetic senses is also making science pathetic. Every subject carries its aesthetic sense. Like mathematics, it is a humanized subject; Galilileo says about it: Mathematics is the language of nature. But we teach it in a dehumanized way and neglect its sense of language, which is its aesthetic sense. So, the science of mathematics has become pathetic for learners.

Popular science can help promote scientific culture in a science-pathetic society. Popular sciences urge the layman to build scientific attitudes. Pure scientific theories are available only in high-level books and science journals that are readable or accessible only by experts in the field. So, popular sciences can engage people toward scientific attitudes. As Carl Jung says in his book that: science is not a thing, but an attitude

Now, it is up to us do we want to unlock science and spread it in society or remain confined in the rooms of educational bosses.var /*674867468*/