In my last article, I explored the question of whether or not the state schools can be, as they are required to be by law, ‘secular’. This was in response to the indignation over Māori spirituality being introduced into schools and ECE on the premise that it is ‘culture’, not ‘religion’.
I now want to consider the more complicated issue of ‘Māori knowledge’ being touted as ‘science’. This has, if anything, occasioned even more outrage. Belief and myth, we are told, should never be allowed to replace science.
Maybe this is annoying, but I would like to point out that ‘science’ is not a fixed opposite of belief and myth. It depends on where you’re standing. For instance, some of my readers will believe in evolution and a very old earth. I don’t: I’m a young earth creationist. Neither of us can prove our position scientifically, because to prove something scientifically you have to be able to repeat the experiment. Neither of us can bring out evidence that will convince the other, because we don’t want to be convinced. (I’m speaking of myself and a hypothetical other, so please don’t be offended if this doesn’t describe you.) Each of us will call our own view ‘fact’ and the other’s view ‘belief’ and ‘myth’.
Much of what goes for ‘science is simply opinion and belief, and it is power plays that determine which unproven beliefs will wear the mantle of ‘science’ or ‘fact’. This is becoming more apparent all the time – it’s not just matauranga Māori that is elevated to this exalted position: it’s climate change, gender fluidity and all that other nonsense. But this isn’t something new: arguably, it has always been power that has determined what is and what isn’t scientific fact.
Strictly speaking, there is no such thing as science. There are the sciences and there is the scientific method. The scientific method is great and has done a tremendous amount, as have the sciences. But they are limited. True science is in a constant state of flux, in the nature of the case: theories and hypotheses are formulated and tested, then revised, or abandoned and replaced, and experiments or investigations go on. Much useful knowledge is discovered in this way. Problems arise when people look to science for certainty, because certainty is not the business of true science.
We all know the pronouncements we’ve been forced to listen to over the last few years: ‘trust the science’, ‘believe the science’ or ‘follow the science’. It only takes a moment’s thought to realise that trust, believe and follow are not scientific terms. They are religious terms. This is what happens when a society abandons belief in God and in divine revelation. Something must fill the gap and provide the certainty that human beings crave. ‘Science’ has been chosen to fill that place and thrust into a role it was never intended to play.
If you want to call for more of the scientific method and more concrete proof, fine. I am calling for honesty around how much is fact and how much is opinion. If you can show that you can repeat an experiment, great. But unproven hypotheses that are put forward as ‘truth’ or ‘scientific fact’, simply because powerful forces have decided to put them in that position, really have no more scientific validity than matauranga Māori.
