I'll Take a Bowl of Science With Some Existential Crisis on the Side, Please

Science.

1.      Describe your interest in and understanding of the life sciences as you entered SUU.

When I entered SUU, I was a frightened little freshman with a mental ego. I was ugly, and I knew it, but I was smart. My brain has been the source of my parents’ pride for as long as I can remember (I mean, have you seen my face? Just kidding.) I left high school with an interest in the medical field for two reasons. First, I was great at memorizing things. I have a moderately-okay photographic memory, so I had a fantastic time in my high school Biology class memorizing Latin names, remembering the positions of different anatomical features, and so on. This was right around the time when I was swooning over Dr. Cameron in Fox’s House M.D., and so began my heavy interest in medicine and the life sciences, with my naïve brain thinking that I wanted to become a doctor. You see, being a doctor sounded great to a teenager with acne and not many friends: the benefits would be wonderful (money, women, power, and women). However, I had also found peace in memorizing facts. I didn’t have the greatest time in high school, and what ended up being my “fun recreation” outside of school was typing up chapter outlines from my Biology book. I thought, “If I can’t be attractive and sociable and popular, I might as well be smart and ace every test.” Facts were easy, and the life sciences were based completely on logical facts. This was my initial interest in the life sciences as I entered SUU: it was easy for me, and seemed like studying the field would lead me down a path of happiness (MWP+W), while also stroking my ego of “I am very smart”.

However, things have changed. My interest in the life sciences is still burning brightly, though the interest in the spectrum of fields within the life sciences is exacerbated by my relatively new interest in philosophy. When I first started at SUU, I enjoyed facts and things that were easy to remember. However, I ended up enrolling in several philosophy classes over the years and have since developed a strong interest in the “why?” of science, which you cannot easily memorize. For example, questioning the philosophy of mind has sparked an intense interest within myself in regards to neuroscience and the natural wonder of the brain. The more that I learn within the field of science, the more that I realize I know nothing and I am not that special. The more that I learn in other fields of study, the more that I realize we have an incomplete body of knowledge within the life sciences. To put it shortly, I am a greater skeptic: I practice critical thinking naturally throughout my day. I don’t believe things at face value. I understand that concepts from seemingly unconnected fields of study may in fact be heavily interconnected. I understand that the varying systems functioning within our bodies are a natural miracle, and the unimaginable chance of life evolving to this point on our planet is simply due to different forces of nature interacting with each other at the speed of light. My rendition of the meaning of science has changed drastically over the last few years: I began as a superficial fact-memorizer, and ended up discovering the precious delicateness of life. I am now at a point where I wish to discover why the facts of the universe are the way they are, and science will help me get there: the scientific method is humanity’s best chance of producing an accurate description of the world that we live in.

2.      What has been your biggest insight on how scientists work and think about the world?

My biggest insight into the minds of scientists is that understanding is completely subjective. The reasons that one scientist may come to the same conclusion as another scientist may be completely different. The initial discovery of a now-canon theory may have been a complete accident, or simply not formulated from a logical progression of ideas (a last resort, if you will). I have realized that the greatest scientific minds think in novel ways and permit the formulation of unorthodox thoughts. However, I have also learned that science may also unfortunately limit the investigation into novel theories due to the fact that no prior evidence exists to give reason into the investigation. I believe that many of the most important scientific discoveries were pure accidents which could not have been produced by following a logical progression of ideas. For this, I wish that more funding was appropriated to pure experimentation where the reasons for doing something may be “just to see what happens”, and then building off of any knowledge gained. (Keep your fingers crossed that I don’t become the budgeting manager for the NIH).

I have also realized that the field of study pertaining to individual scientists will greatly influence the way they think about the world. Mathematicians may have a more abstract perspective on the world than, say, a geologist or a biologist. However, this means one thing: scientists use the knowledge they have gained and understand to great detail to formulate future theories and ideas to novel situations. I think this offers a fantastic moral to the story of science: learn as much as you can, in as many fields as you can, because a concept you investigate today in physics may open your eyes to further knowledge down the road in biology. Don’t sell yourself short by specializing in a single field without broadening your understanding with the help of other fields of science.

3.      How do you imagine science will play a part in the world you’ll be joining once you graduate?

Honestly, I have no idea, and that reasoning is due to politics. I see the following courses of action taking place: both science and logical reasoning will take over the planet and we will see improvement in every aspect of life, or science will be beaten down by narrow-minded thinkers and the planet will turn to chaos. The current year is 2016, and humanity is at its peak of scientific understanding, yet we cannot come to a consensus that climate change is an actual phenomenon. I believe that the time for science is now, and if humanity cannot reason that the scientific method is the natural path to truth, we may reach the point of no-return in regards to the continued existence of intelligent life on Earth.

However, if all goes well and the merits of science become understood on a much larger scale across every culture and class, then science will become the norm. We will investigate everything on a scientific basis, and humanity will work towards improving the planet and ourselves. Our moral code may be rewritten once traditional (non-scientific) trains of thought are abandoned. Really, I think that science will have an enormous impact on the world in more ways than I can imagine, and I am holding on to hope for that outcome.

Plus, the job market would be sweet, and my degree may end up being worth something!