I Believed Science Provided Proof

Growing up in the US educational system, we were taught that science provided proof. Perhaps it was never framed in that exact manner but still young boys and girls came away with that message. Class exercises centered around using the scientific method to arrive at a given result instead of using the scientific method as a way to explore a question. Science in American grade schools and high schools was mostly formulaic with little room for creativity or unbounded inquiry. This is perhaps why I was not personally drawn to pursuing a life of science in my younger years.

However despite believing that I did not have a personal calling to become a scientist, I still held a healthy reverence for science. How could you not when we are constantly bombarded by the media with results from researchers that "prove" this or "confirm" that? All researchers, as portrayed in the media, are labeled as experts and its hard to refute an expert when you have little to back up your opinions. So in other words, scientists were gods of knowledge. And everyone knows that you never question the gods.

So when I headed to college I pursued architecture as a career. It satisfied my creative side as well as my parents' practical side, so it was a win-win as far as career choices go. Through my education it became apparent that there were more happy accidents in architecture then deliberate manipulations of space. So every building that is built ends up being an incredibly expensive experiment in functionality and design. Shouldn't we be learning from every construction project? In the medical field they collect this type of information to better the whole field of medicine. So why is no one utilizing this wealth of information in the field of architecture? A better question may be... why is there a lack of research in the field of architecture?

Science is clearly the answer and the savior for the profession of architecture.

Believing that science provided proof, one would assume that you could just go to some scientists and ask for proof that what they deemed important and right was in fact true. It's like going to see the wizard and asking for a brain. Except in this case instead of a heart-felt lesson about self-confidence, the scientists laughed at us. Why did they laugh at us? Because apparently science DOES NOT provide proof. What do you say? Yeah, the earth is round and Santa Claus does not exist. Have a nice day.

It seems to be a little guarded secret among scientists that they believe other scientists are generally full of shit. Science seems to be more about the process than the result. It focuses on intelligent questioning and lots of skepticism. Sure, there will always be problems with methodology, reservations about the types of analyzes that were used, and disagreements about theory, but in the end this our best means of inquiry.

But do not for one second forget that it does not provide proof.

"What we observe is not nature itself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning." -- Werner Heisenberg (Physics & Philosophy, 1963)