The struggle between the natural and social sciences has been a long-time battle, especially in the environmental community. Both sides use similar arguments to support their sides, which we can look at using the three argument types that we used in our classes on anthropocene: counting to 1/monism, counting to 2/dualism, counting beyond 2/understanding that the world cannot be separated into categories.
Roan and I talked about this in terms of theater: monism – theater is ritualistic, dualism – ritual versus theater, counting beyond 2 – the concept of audience is limited because connections between the people involved are limitless. These can even be applied to some of our readings on science:
Unifying Knowledge: Wilson (2001) called for the unity of knowledge, that the sciences can and should connect to the social sciences. This means more than just the idea that education should be interdisciplinary. Instead it argues that science is the foundation of all knowledge, even art can be boiled down to the sciences and should be taught as such (why pictures of the savanna as best art pieces/habitat as caves, etc). All things can be boiled down to survival of the fittest and the need to pass on genes and survive; evolution is always the answer.
Humanism: Berry (2000) claims directly opposing to Wilson, that we are nothing if we only work based upon science. Very humanistic and dualistic in that there are those who use science as the only evidence, and those who step back (but do not give up on science) and look at the humanities. Berry attempts to move beyond 2 by suggesting we try to stop categorizing everything and instead just accept them for what they are.
I first looked at these two readings on science because they are at opposite ends of the argument scale – counting to 1 and counting beyond 2. While I liked the way in which Wilson presented his argument, it was nonetheless monistic and left out important connections. Berry on the other-hand, provided a view that allowed for the dynamics of our world and the connectedness that comes with counting beyond 2. Although I liked the final argument of Berry’s article, it was difficult not to be put off by the way that his writing steered toward the “as long as there is love, it will all be okay” argument.
My mom is an elementary school teacher – 4th grade – and I try not to think that far back in my education most days, but talking about categorizing education always reminds me of elementary school. Specifically it makes me think of that transition from one classroom and one teacher, to six classrooms and however many teachers. All of a sudden, our education is separated by more than just the lunch bell. Instead, entire floors or classrooms are deciding how our education is split up. And it’s not often that you seen the science class right next to the history class. My mom is one of the best teachers I’ve ever met, and I know that because she subbed for my class at least once every single year of my elementary school life. I love talking with her about school because not only is she teaching students at a very important age to create foundational knowledge, but she also gets to connect school subjects in pretty much whatever way she wants. Maybe college needs to start looking a little more like elementary school…