Some strategic problems with the scientific endeavour

I believe that progress in scientific knowledge is being hindered by several factors. First, knowledge is increasing faster than it can be reviewed, digested, and integrated. The rate of increase in scientific knowledge, for example knowledge about the brain and human psychology, is exponentially increasing and, in fact, in the last decade or so, has been explosive. New techniques such as brain scans and methods for exploring the “adaptive” unconscious are being applied to a constantly wider range of topics ranging from the classical areas such as learning, memory, attention, sexuality, and sports psychology to name but a few.

Secondly younger scientists in order to keep up to date can hardly take time to review the history of important historical events and trends in science. Consequently Sci-mat, which especially welcomes the speculations and reflections of retired scientists, provides a novel opportunity for mature scientists to reflect on previous research results and theories and integrate them with current research to create new theories of brain and mental function. When I think of the older biological research papers, for example in physiology, which were written before the Watson and Crick DNA revolution, I wonder how much important information has been lost.

A particular problem with respect to psychology, and perhaps to some other sciences, is that there is no general theory, to connect the latest advances in the many sub-disciplines of psychology ranging from neuropsychology to evolutionary psychology let alone related sciences such as anthropology. This makes it difficult to integrate material (assuming one person was able to understand research in these disparate specialities).

One final problem is that there are few places that scientists feel free to speculate freely about their scientific ideas and theories. I know from my own nearly half century of personal experience as a research neurobiologist and later clinical psychologist is that making “wild” speculative theories is frowned upon by working scientists in their everyday research. It is further hoped that other retired scientists who like myself, are not competing for research grants, will feel free to share their ideas. After all, we no longer have to guard against being scooped in the highly competitive arena of scientific research.

I hope that this blog acts as an antidote to these problems by providing a place to broadly reflect and imaginatively speculate on the implications of the most recent scientific discoveries for the advancement of mankind.

Introduction: Purpose and invitation

The name “Sci-mat”, short for science matters, was chosen to reflect that the purpose of this blog is to provide a platform to express opinions about recent developments, and possible applications, of science in general. The second reason for choosing Sci-mat is that I deeply believe that science does indeed matter; I am optimistic about the power of science to improve the quality of human life. A third reason for the name Sci-mat is more personal. I am a mature, 73 year old, semi-retired scientist and clinical psychologist living in Singapore. On “good” days, when my old brain is working well, I come up with what I think are great ideas and speculations about scientific matters but have few, if any, opportunities to discuss them. I hope Sci-mat provides an opportunity for informal discussion by mature scientist who are formally retired from science but who still have a passion for it. There may also be a few like myself who have a double background in neurscience and psychology and are looking for an informal opportunity to discuss their ideas.

However I also want to make Sci-mat inclusive. Everyone, no matter what age and educational background, who is fascinated by new discoveries in science and is optimistic about the potential of these discoveries to improve the lot of mankind is most wellcome.

I would love to receive your comments and reactions so that Sci-mat becomes a place for an enjoyable, creative, and useful conversation about scientific matters.
Dr. Brian Scott