So the quote I texted to a (geek) friend of mine was:
Overly organized research is confining, and guaranteed to produce nothing new.
-- TIO HOLTZMAN,
letter to Lord Niko Bludd
(The Butlerian Jihad, p. 154)
My friend, who also happens to be a graduate student and therefore one who is engaging in research, responded back with something like "That's BS from an inexcusable, unmitigated hack!!" Now I don't have the direct quote, but you get the idea. I countered by pointing out that Norma Cenva, who came to work with Tio Holtzman, may never have made the extraordinary discoveries she did without the influence of Savant Holtzman. But my friend would not back down an inch, spewing pure venom.
Well, over 100 pages later, we find Norma developing new ideas:
Mostly, though, she pondered wild, ideas, the more unusual the better. On Rossak, her mother had never encouraged her to consider impractical possibilities, but here Tio Holtzman welcomed them. (The Butlerian Jihad, p. 287)
As a researcher myself, I was fascinated by the quote from Tio Holtzman. I am a hyper-organized person but I have learned to observe and learn from what might initially seem to be chaos. It is unorthodox, but Savant Holtzman's advice frees the mind to consider the impossible. So I'll wrap up this entry with a "chapter-starter" from Serena Butler:
Only those with narrow minds fail to see that the definition of Impossible is 'Lack of imagination and incentive.'
-- SERENA BUTLER
(The Butlerian Jihad, p. 159)
It is true - Holtzman provides Norma with a space and context that allows her a quality of life never-before conceived of or realized before leaving Rossak. More than that, in providing her with a place to conduct research, and in encouraging her work, Holtzman inspires Norma - and the results? Paradigm altering breakthroughs again and again.
ReplyDeleteI am inclined to agree with the texting geek - Holtzman presents an important problem with scientific inquiry. Namely, that all science is not good science. Allow me to explain.
"Who Rules in Science?" by James Brown is an excellent primer in philosophy of science that should be required reading for anyone conducting serious research in any discipline. In his chapter, "The Role of Reason," Brown discusses some of the problems of assuming objectivity in science through Paul Forman's sociological account of the scientists of the Weimar Republic creation of noncausal quantum mechanics. To sum up, Forman argues that the Weimar scientists adopted the new paradigm in order to "appeal to the general public and thereby regain their previous high social standing" rather than on rational evidence alone.
Brown provides a rationalist counterpoint that might explain an alternative reason: "that the old quantum theory was not a coherent set of principles; the new theory of Heisenberg and others accounted for a wider range of phenomena..." and so on.
Brown uses this and other examples to set up an important distinction between what he calls "pragmatic reasons" and "evidential reasons."
Brown: "A scientist has evidential reason for believing, say, quantum mechanics, when she has reason and evidence for thinking quantum mechanics best achieves the scientific goals of truth, empirical adequacy, and so on...a scientist has pragmatic reasons for believing quantum mechanics when she has reason and evidence for believing that by accepting the quantum theory, her nonscientific aims are best promoted."
Now, why bring this up? Tio Holtzman's motivations, like those of the Weimar scientists, are deeply suspect from the moment we meet him. It is made painfully clear that Holtzman is floundering in his work, lacking inspiration or recent breakthroughs, and his calculations and methodology are sloppy. In other words, while Holtzman may be providing Cenva with the scientific opportunity of her life, his reasons for doing so have nothing to do with rational inquiry.
Holtzman welcomes Cenva's paradigm-altering breakthrough's because he treats them as his own discoveries. We see him accepting accolades and awards for what are thought to be HIS discoveries; making incredible profits from what the outside world presumes are HIS designs; and wields an authority within the human worlds that is totally unrelated to his actual scientific success.
Holtzman is the most dangerous kind of scientist: cloaked in the aura of rigor, method, and the experimental process, he serves his own ends before science. He is an outstanding example of a researcher who seeks progress for pragmatic rather than evidential reasons. And while Cenva certainly enjoys a better quality of life in the early stages of their work relationship, Holtzman takes advantage of her at every turn.
So, humans have some reason to glorify Holtzman, but it is important to recognize the motivations behind his research because motivations and expectations color and shape scientific inquiry and therefore, effect results.
Finally - of all his work, Holtzman's greatest contribution to humanity...was hiring Norma Cenva. I suppose it was his own pragmatic reasoning that we have to thank for that.
Well stated texting geek and I agree on most all the points. Norma's methods and approach to scientific inquiry are above reproach. And although it is true that the invention referred to in the passage from the book is really Norma's idea and that Tio takes full credit for it, it was not her own independent idea. She took Tio's work and by delving deeper in to the science he illuminated, she developed another application. In this case, it was the gel circuitry blaster.
ReplyDeleteHowever, Holtzman DID develop the Holtzman Equations and the practical application of the shielding energy. His idea had been to shield a whole planet but Norma pointed out the problems with that and suggested shielding on a smaller scale. But he came up with the equations and the shield. That was remarkable. And the fact that the equations were named for him is justified. Norma did not play a role in developing those equations.
Inevitably, however, her role in human history is much bigger than you suspect. And I mean more than what you know from reading the prequels.