The Science of Liberty
| Author Timothy Ferris has been recognized as a skilled popularizer of science for decades (his credentials include writing award-winning books on science, producing PBS-programs, and serving as editor of Rolling Stone). In this 290-page book, Ferris argues that science (the practice of making systematic observations to explain phenomena) and liberty (the social and political theory focusing on both individual rights and human dignity) and mutually compatible, and even inseparable. Without science, liberty is unobserved in societies; and without liberty, science is unobserved in societies. |
Contents
Science & Liberty
Ferris begins by defining science as an anti-authoritarian, powerful, social practice that depends on free access to resources. He continues by defining liberty as the social condition that depends on liberal (that which “safeguards fundamental human rights”) and secular democracy, education for all, and an economic commitment of the society to research.
Science & Liberalism
In contemporary poplar culture (at least in the United States), two political philosophies, liberal and conservative, are recognized. Ferris points out that liberty and Liberalism, the political philosophy derived from the idea of liberty, is different from the common definition. Rather than a simple continuum, with conservatives on one end and liberals on the other, Ferris suggests a triangle, with conservative, liberals, and progressives each on a vertex more accurately describes the relationship between these political theories.
The Rise of Science
Ferris traces the beginning of science to the Renaissance.
The Science of Enlightenment
Science and liberalism became strong social forces during the Enlightenment.
American Independence
Ferris describes the rise of American democracy as an example of how science and liberty are mutually supportive. Among the thinkers who contributed to the development of science/liberty in North America are Thomas Paine, Ben Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and George Washington. Ferris does recognize some of the contradictions in this history, however, including the fact that Jefferson and Washington were slave-owners.
The Terror
In Europe, the French Revolution, appeared to have common elements to the American Revolution, but science and liberty were not realized in that revolution, and so it failed.
Power
Two meanings of power are considered by Ferris. First, the contributions of science and liberty to the development of the combustion engines and the electrical devices that drove the industrial revolution, Second, the use of such devices to drive colonial expansion by European countries.
Progress
Ferris argues that the human condition (as measured by a number of health and lifestyle characteristics) has been improved in all societies because of the discoveries of science. Further, he argues, in those societies where science and liberty are the norm, the human condition shows more progress, with longer healthier and happier lives for the citizens of those societies.
The Science of Wealth
As a continuation of the chapter on progress, Ferris argues that societies marked by science and liberty are wealthier.
Totalitarian Antiscience
In the history of the 20th century, we can see a number of examples of societies in which “scientists” was driven by totalitarian politics rather than by nature. Ferris describes how both science, liberty, and humans suffered as a result. Among the examples Ferris describes are Lysenko's failed agricultural studies in communist Russia, similar failed agriculture in communist China, and failures of fascist and communist states in both the space race and the nuclear arms race. The absence of mention of the recent bans on government funding of certain stem cell research in the United States gives the impression that totalitarian antiscience only arises in fascist and communist states, however.
Academic Antiscience
In the second half of the 20th century, postmodernism (a philosophy proclaimed by many to be anti-scientific) spread across universities around the west. Ferris adds his voice to those who are criticizing this philosophy, and that rejects socially-constructed explanations of phenomena. While science is the best method humans have for gaining insight into how natural phenomena occur, to dismiss any role for societies role in problem-framing, problem-solving, and the interpretation of data is to ignore humanity's role in science (the penultimate human activity).
One World
Ferris concludes by exploring how two contemporary situations illustrate is thesis. First, the rise of totalitarian states in the middle east. Second, the debate over global warming. In each case Ferris argues that science and liberty are being ignore in both cases and that humanity is suffering as a result. Throughout the book, an underlying theme has been that science and democracy as practiced in the United States should be the exemplar for the world (in several cases the argument that “it may not be perfect, but it is better than the options” is given). I think Ferris missed an opportunity to point out that even our democracy can fall to the anti-science and anti-liberty forces that affect the rest of the world, and that only through education and dialogue do we keep science and liberty.