"I've
noticed," Mr. Tappin observed, "there doesn't seem to be a lot of talk about the
notion of truth in your characterization of science. Given that many people normally link
issues of scientific evidence and demonstration with the idea of having, to some extent,
proven that something is true, I'm wondering if you might elaborate a little on this
aspect of science."
"Naturally,"
Dr. Yardley replied, "researchers hope that, in some way, elements of reality are
faithfully captured in what is retained by the scientific community. Similarly,
researchers hope everything which we eliminate is being thrown out because it lacks this
quality of faithfulness or reflectivity when compared with experience, experiment,
analysis and so on.
"In
fact, generally speaking, there are only two kinds of mistake which can be made in
science. On the one hand, we can retain something which, in reality, turns out to be
incorrect, erroneous, false, and, therefore, in some sense, distortive with respect to our
experience. On the other hand, we can eliminate something which, in reality, turns out to
correct, accurate, true, and, therefore, is, in some sense, reflective of experience.
"The
problem in all of this is that, quite frequently, there are distortive elements mixed in
with the reflective features which are retained, just as there often are reflective
elements mixed in with the distortive features which are eliminated. This adds to the
ambiguity of the situation to which I alluded earlier, and this also helps to explain why
researchers are not inclined to rush to judgement about what should be retained or
eliminated, and also why some individuals are reluctant to eliminate certain possibilities
despite a contrary judgement by the consensus of opinion of the scientific community.
"Oddly
enough, at least from the perspective of some people, scientists are more inclined to want
to talk about the beauty of a theory rather than its truth. Etched deep in the psyche of
many a scientist is the belief that whatever truth or reality may ultimately turn out to
be, it will be beautiful as well.
"Because
the truth is not always easy to come by or discover, scientists sometimes use the beauty
of a theory as a possible index or sign of the presence of truth within the theory. Like
so many bag-people, researchers furiously rifle through the garbage cans of empirical data
in search of the nuggets of truth which are to be retained while we wait for the dump
trucks of history to remove the remaining refuse, and, often times, the only thing which
sustains our search is the beauty of the receptacles through which we are foraging and the
belief that such beauty is, at least in part, derived from the sweet smell and colors of
truth contained somewhere in the garbage cans through which we are searching."
"What
is meant by the notion of the beauty of a theory," the defense counsel inquired.
"The
beauty of a theory is not always easy to pin down. A lot of the time, researchers
recognize such beauty when they encounter it, but they would be hard pressed, if asked, to
delineate the nature of such beauty prior to, and sometimes even after, the actual
encounter experience.
"There
are, however, some classic indices usually associated with the beauty of a theory. For
instance, a beautiful theory often tends to be able to lend a directed and consistent
sense of meaning and organizational orientation to disparate sets of data, observations,
ideas, experiments, and findings.
"Normally
speaking, the data of life look like a scatter diagram with the temporal, spatial and
qualitative co-ordinates of experience appearing as just so many unconnected and unrelated
points. Then, someone comes along with a theory which shows a way of connecting many of
the plotted points of experience in a very consistent, meaningful and organized manner,
sort of like when one comes up with a regression line to give linear expression to the
various tendencies contained within the scatter diagram at which one has been staring and
trying to make sense out of its many data points.
"When
one sees conceptual order emerge out of seeming chaos and disorder, the experience is a
very aesthetic one. The beauty being given expression through this aesthetic dimension is
very compelling and alluring.
"Another
qualitative index of a beautiful theory revolves around the notion of simplicity. The
capacity of a theory to take a few fundamental ideas and weave them together into complex
patterns which can encompass an ever-expanding horizon of experiences, possibilities, and
so on, has the aura of beauty about it.
"No
matter how complicated things become, one always can return to the few simple ideas out of
which the theoretical tapestry has been woven and, thereby, develop a deep aesthetic
appreciation for how the whole pattern has arisen as a function of those underlying ideas.
Under such circumstances, one's understanding may be fuzzy with respect to the details and
minutiae of theoretical complexity, but grasping the simple elements and forces which
bind, and animate, the complexity, allows one to be able to orient oneself in the midst of
uncertainty.
"This
dimension of simplicity has a quality of beauty about it. When researchers encounter this
property, we tend to be very attracted by it.
"A
third index of a theory's beauty revolves around the heuristic value and power of such a
theory. This quality is intimately connected to the two previous facets of theoretical
beauty, namely its dimensions of simplicity and organizational capacity.
"When
one combines organizational strength with simplicity, this tends to lead to a conceptual
dialectic and dynamic which becomes very fruitful with respect to the possibilities,
ideas, experiments, hypotheses and explorations which are set in motion by this kind of
dialectic and dynamic. The more fruitful a theory is in these respects, the more powerful,
stimulating, productive, and valuable the theory becomes.
"This
heuristic component of a theory - that is, its conceptual and experimental fruitfulness,
and, therefore, its power - is, obviously, very desirable. When researchers encounter it,
we tend to find it to be a thing of beauty.
"A
fourth index of beauty in scientific thinking revolves around the notion of symmetry. This
property deals with the capacity of a theory to allow different parameters and variables
within that system to undergo operational transformations without the essential aspects of
the theory being altered, so that observers in various frameworks will agree these
essential features remain the same across the transformations, and, therefore, such
features are said to be conserved.
"Finally,"
the professor concluded, "there is an aura of integrity and nobility about a theory
which possesses beauty. A beautiful theory tends to stand against the onslaught of
confusion, error, darkness, ignorance, and corruption which surround us- repelling, in an
eloquent and elegant fashion, the potential forces of conceptual and social dissolution.
"All in
all, the aesthetics of a beautiful theory allow researchers to develop a feeling for some
of the realities with which they are attempting to deal. By following this aesthetic pull,
researchers are quite frequently led to closer approximations of, or better reflections
of, the truths which often are aligned closely to the presence of beauty in a theory.
"I
suppose, in many ways, researchers believe it is not possible for a theory to exhibit the
various dimensions of beauty, such as organizational meaning, simplicity, heuristic value,
symmetry and integrity, without the truth being involved in some fashion. Consequently,
seen from this perspective, science really becomes a rigorous, methodical exploration for
the elements of truth or reality which researchers believe are being reflected in, and,
consequently, that are responsible for, a given theory's beauty."
