Science In Action

Science In Action
Scientific Jargon
To appreciate the nature of matter from direct observation (concrete operational thinking -Piaget's psychoanalysis) to conceptual thinking (formal operational thinking) scientists use modeling and jargon words.

The approach of a biologist (investigating of biological phenomena) is to develop a  microscope to visualize the small particles that cannot be seen by the naked eye.

This is what Hook did (not Dr.Hook).

The microscope has its own limitations by nature of the optics (lenses) utilized. When one comes to a level where the resolution of the microscope was a handicap scientist with curiosity (in the last century) developed the electron microscope. The electron microscope actually gives a negative image of a sub-cellular structure somewhat similar to a negative of a photographic image before printing. This static pictures taken as serial images in different planes of cutting (tissues have to be cut to very thin sections by embedding into plastic resins) have to be interpreted in a functional way for us to understand the three dimensional impressions ( in a way the human eye can visualize images) of sub-cellular material and at this point the thinking process of the mind takes over the interpretation of the observable but grossly enlarged (out of proportion to the real state of the matter) image. 
The image (physical) and impression (thought process) has to merge at some point of our thinking to make meaning out of the non-sensible static image.

There is a big difference between a cartoon and a image of a electron microscope. Even a child could understand the pun involved in the cartoon but to understand the image of an electron microscopic  it has to be interpreted and made into a plane picture perceptible to the eye.

Some degree of imagination and thinking has to be utilized to understand the reality at microscopic level. This process of transformation into conceptual image develops over time and in some probably it is developed only rudimentary.

From concrete operational (direct experience) thinking  to formal (acceptable to science and teaching of science) operational thinking is a very big step in psychological development.

What is amazing is that children (and many adults too) do not shed their direct experience (and their thinking with it) when the conceptual development is progressing in their development (which has inherent variability).

This is a handicap (in a way blessing in disguise) the children from the age of  8 to 16 years undergo and overcome.

Bombarding with factual knowledge at this stage of development is a serious problem from the point of view of the child. 

It is believed that conceptual development occurs at the age of 16 and many do not develop this even at 30 years of age and even then function at a very rudimentary stage.

There is another barrier that is associated with psychological development. 
It is the language itself. 
The language and grammatical structure did not evolve in parallel with science (and its development).

Language development and acquisition pre-dated the development of science by more than 2000 years. 
It is only in the last hundred years that the Language of Science started integrating  with the standard languages of the West. 
Scientific terms that emerged in the West were not kind to Eastern languages and if not for the Pali Language (specially Abhidhamma terminology) teaching Science would have been much more difficult.

Unfortunately the people who started translating scientific terminology went in tangents to the tenent of Pali which was meant for different purpose. 
By doing this they not only destroyed Sinhala and also distorted the proper interpretation of Pali Language with a strong bias on ethical and moral principles based on soteriology (salvation from bondage of Sansara, the repeated cycle of birth).

The end result is that we are producing poor quality scientific thinkers and educators.

Add to this in the last thirty years the Computer Languages took some bearing in the modern world. 
It is called the binary language taking its roots from the property of electricity so that the computer terms can be converted to machine language.

Unfortunately there is a trend in this country where people with limited understanding of computing (but with commercial interest) try to translate computer language into ordinary Sinhala. 

This attempt is going to be a total failure by all standards.

I should make some observations as a Linux Convert (considering that the any stealing including computer software as a form of crime not acceptable in five precepts). In a computer shop in Kandy recently, some school going children were making complaints to the shop assistant as regard to a CD they have purchased. They were unable to install the said software package without the password which they had to get from a Colombo address by telephone. I was inquisitive because this was in Sinhala but my gut feelings were that this was a pirated version. I was right. The perpetrator has copied an entire package and had the audacity to suppress (that also possibly a pirated password) the password file and place his own graphic interface in Sinhala with a alphanumeric (English) number of his own as  a password. This is cheating at three levels to make a few bucks from poor school children not literate in English.

I told those young boys you better learn Computing in English by doing that you would probably improve your English too.  
They had an agreeing nod but whether they have the tenacity  for such an endeavour is open to question.
 
This shows how backward our education system is?

I am one who believe that Sinhala is not the stream to learn science in a constructive way form my childhood and I need to be proved otherwise by the learned educationalists in the department of education.

If our planners especially the education specialists do not take heed to this scenario our education will be behind by hundred of years (already lagging behind in comparison to Asian neighbours including Korea).

The scientific and computer jargon is a serious handicap to exchange of information.

Quite oblivious to any national needs the scientist take leaps and bounds in introducing new concepts and jargon in this world.

The latest I learned were transcriptome and proteome (two new words in genetics). 
Bit of a hack and a crack at the scientists is worthwhile at this stage of my open communication.

Why the scientists cannot think of some simple terms instead of quantum, quarks, lepton and photon and the like?

Why not use the words like fashion, style, charm, elegance, appeal, quality and the ordinary word like bugs (bed bugs and other bugs)?

Aren't they (scientists) inelegant people?

Only scientific word I love to mention is Chaos especially because we are in chaos in education sense.

Modeling

Modeling is an acceptable way of expressing situations which we cannot observe directly. 
Models help us to understand what we observe and predict what will happen in situations that we cannot observe. Eventually we may become so convinced of the reliability of the model or the security of the model image and that we tend to accept it as total reality without any objection or question. 

The distinction between the model and the reality disappears in our teaching of science and in turn this inhibits the acceptance of new ideas.
The atomic model is a good example and everybody accepts it as a good model and almost certain reality but few thinkers deviated from this mode of thinking and went into talk about quarks and antiparticles and the like.

Our educationists in science also have gone into hibernation after the atomic model and canceling the practicals for the advance level examination (due to inherent inability to hold examinations full proof so that some elements can doctor the results) is one example of this squint eye phenomenon.

It is high time at least from "middle school age" the children are brought up looking for both knowledge and wisdom with open mind rather than "programed minds"of the education department.

Restricting them to free books published by the education department which are probably 30 years outdated is not the panacea for a long term problem of updating and "learning on the go".