Science
Jacob Bronowski
[Reprinted from The Center Magazine,
November-December 1984]
The ideal of science is (in principle) to present a model of nature
as a closed system of laws or axioms, from which the phenomena of the
real world could all be shown to derive. However, it has now become
clear that this ideal cannot be attained, either in practice or in
principle. Modern theorems in logic make it evident that any system of
axioms which seeks to describe nature will always be found to be
incomplete.
Thus the system of science at any tune is provisionally closed in the
present, yet it necessarily remains open to the future. From time to
tune, a great scientific mind becomes convinced that a new phenomenon
cannot be derived by any rearrangement within the accepted system of
laws; and he then enlarges (and modifies) the system by proposing an
additional law or axiom. Modern logic shows that this step cannot be
supported by any logical procedure. It is an act of imagination, which
takes the mind beyond the action of any logical machine; and it can in
fact be taken as a definition of imagination, both in the sciences and
in the arts.
The mind is forced to go beyond logic because a logical machine is
circumscribed by the contradictions that arise when it uses its
language to describe its own actions. The human brain, of course,
cannot escape these problems of self-reference, which are implied from
the beginning in cogito, ergo sum. Science is a procedure for
circumventing these problems by pushing them (as it were) into the
future; that is, by always treating the present system as
provisionally closed. But the arts cannot make this separation, even
provisionally; the writer, for example, sets out to share his state of
mind with the reader, and literature owes its power to this
self-reference. This is why science can be treated as a machine for
turning information into (provisional) instructions for action, and
the arts cannot: through them we enter nature as a pure state of
information.
|