Close-mindedness
Science is an academic discipline that gathers a variety of interdisciplinary subjects and ideas to provide mankind knowledge. The study of science is so profound that, “we glorify freedom and choice but submit to the transformation of our culture by technoscience as a virtual fate” (Cayley & Wynne). Science aids livelihoods from different cultural and racial backgrounds and grants essential needs outside of just the human realm. With this, we could assume that there is a tremendous amount of communication and people from different backgrounds in the scientific field, right? Unfortunately, the answer is not a simple ‘yes.’
There is a common theme of close-mindedness in science. Individuals outside of just the scientific field must understand, listen, and accept the differences in others. Our current system reeks white supremacy and acknowledges primarily white men. Our understanding of science is mostly from white men’s privileged discoveries. Why is this a problem when they helped shape our views of science today? White men in the scientific field have the privilege to avoid individuals coming from different backgrounds and have the privilege to “erase the role science has played in perpetuating anti-Black racism and violence” (500 Women Scientists Leadership, 2020). It is morally wrong to exclude scientists of color, and science is unable to reach its highest potential when racial bias and sexism is present in today’s system. It does not help the fact that organizations and people that are surrounded by science are not contributing to voicing the problematic issues: racism and social injustice. The silence is agonizing, and it creates a culture that discourages the discussion of race, gender, and culture and puts scientists from different backgrounds in a hostile working environment (500 Women Scientists Leadership, 2020).
If science were to gain multiple insights from minority groups, rapid advancements in science would be plausible. The minority groups can provide knowledge that white men do not have due to their limited backgrounds. Art, for example, is an expression that has no limit to creativity, plays a significant role in shaping a group’s culture, and can influence science. In the San Francisco conference report of Art as a Way of Knowing, the programs were said to “reflect the ways in which the arts permeate intellectual and cultural life and serve to generate new art/science forums for questioning, redefining, and offering new visions of the relationship between science and society” (McDougall, Bevan & Semper, 2011). Art is portrayed in a broad range of cultures, and using only “white men” art will limit the endless discoveries and possibilities that minority groups can provide.
In addition to adding perspectives from multiple racial backgrounds, science must consider the sexism that occurs in modern science. Although a woman myself, I tend to picture scientists as men with white lab coats because they are represented more than women. In the Standpoint Theory, Halpern describes the feminist standpoint theory: “all knowledge is situated, interpreted, and thus local; and those belonging to marginalized groups are situated in ways that allow them to see more than those who are not” (2019). White men have a dominant perspective, however that does not imply that women have the weaker perspective. Women are able to make unique and knowledgeable claims in regards to scientific phenomena and can broaden the science spectrum if permitted. So, what can we do to avoid close-mindedness in science? We must be able to recognize white supremacy culture stained in the science field.
White supremacy is damaging and toxic. Described in White Supremacy Culture by Tema Okun, minority groups already exist in the science field, however they have to conform to preexisting cultural norms. This implies that their work environment, comfortability, and safety is quite different in comparison to white men. It is unreasonable and unethical, yet it is unfixed. I understand that it makes sense to solely talk about science. However, it further pushes white supremacy in our current system, and it will not change unless those in the science field discuss, accept, and give awareness to various ethnic backgrounds and genders. Perhaps science would be more advanced if they accepted this ideology sooner.
Scientific knowledge should not be limited but instead, limitless. Different perspectives allow a deeper understanding of the world. Unfortunately, it is the theme of close-mindedness that caused white supremacy culture to appear in science, and those different from white men are disregarded in different ways.
References
- 500 Women Scientists Leadership. (2020, June 6). Silence is never neutral; neither is science. Scientific American. https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/silence-is-never-neutral-neither-is-science/
- Cayley, D., & Wynne, B. (n.d.). How to Think About Science — Part 10 [Audio podcast]. https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/1479845960
- Halpern, M. (2019). Feminist standpoint theory and science communication. Journal of Science Communication, 18(4). https://jcom.sissa.it/archive/18/04/JCOM_1804_2019_C01/JCOM_1804_2019_C02
- McDougall, M., Bevan, B., & Semper, R. (2011, March 3). Art as a way of knowing. Retrieved from https://www.exploratorium.edu/knowing/pdfs/ConferenceReport.pdf
- Okun, T. (n.d.). White Supremacy Culture. Retrieved from https://www.dismantlingracism.org/uploads/4/3/5/7/43579015/okun_-_white_sup_culture.pdf
