Science is for Everyone

Science Gone Wrong

As scientists sometimes we are wrong.

Often we are so concerned with doing research in our ivory tower labs we forget whom we are conducting the research for: the people.

Modern research should aid in our evolutionary directive as organisms, or what psychology calls Organisimic Theory.

That evolutionary directive is to maintain and enhance complexity while preserving our overall integrity.

So often we as scientists and researchers focus upon how we can maintain and enhance complexity. Ever deepening our ability to understand and manipulate our environment through science.

It is our ability to choose the domain in which we enhance this understanding and mold it until mastery that drives us. This sense of control and intrinsic growth is a basic need of our human psyche.

But what about that last premise of Organismic Theory?

What about the "overall integrity" of our society?

You see we are more than single organisms. Humans are a grouping of intellectual beings who need each other. Only together are we able to meet one of our most basic psychological needs; relatedness.

However, if we leave members of our group behind in this growth we risk breaking the overall integrity of that group. Worse, we may never know what role these individuals may have played to cement the group now or in the future.

So rather than conducting research for research's sake; what if we were to consider what happens after our findings?

What if we did things like spend 1/4 of our research budgets on presenting the information to the world?

What if we spent time translating it into a language and technique that our peers could use?

What if we spent as much time looking at societal impact as we did finding the answer to our hypothesis?

Would such an environment aid in the formation of a Scenius?

The formation of a society where individuals can better understand science, are exposed to science they might not have ever seen, and are able to understand it more clearly.

Could they participate more actively?

This participation may ultimately result in more complexity. A complexity that allows these individuals create novel connections harness them to their own unique knowledge.

This could lead to more creative endeavors and potentially spawn more scenius's, or unique groups of creatives that are able to change the world.

That is what we do at OTO. We seek to take the science and make it avaliable to the public. We seek to educate, expose, and build systems around these findings that will better our profession and species as a whole.

That said, how many people currently "don't have a place" within the confines of modern science?