Science Debate
Science
Debate
The current Science debate has for me raised more than a few
questions. Some of those questions could lead us down a goodly number of rabbit
holes. Be careful of rabbit holes – there might be a taniwha or two down there
at the same time. More about taniwhas further on where I will differ with one
of the protagonists in the science debate.
The Auckland professors have brought to our attention again
that science is science, is science (Listener 26th July). And that
there are rules, procedures and methods to be followed in producing whatever
the science might be. Think in terms of theory, experimentation, proof, argumentation,
peer review and so on it goes.
The argument advanced by the professors deals with the
origins of science, plus the separation of and definitions of science and
knowledge. The professors were, in what I can describe only as a fair,
reasonable and understandable manner, explaining that Maori knowledge cannot be
regarded as science.
While pointing out the differences the professors have
acknowledged that “indigenous knowledge may indeed help advance scientific
knowledge in some ways, but it is not science”. That was a fair concession to
the matter of Maori knowledge and as a concession it did not deserve the deluge
of vitriol that followed.
The opening argument put
forward by the professors was lost in the ensuing brouhaha. A brouhaha which
came across as more of an academics’ feeding frenzy and haka rolled into one. The
professors’ main concern is with the proposed changes to the NCEA curriculum.
To re-establish context it is worth quoting from the professors’ letter which
itself included a quote from the NCEA working group. The professors have not
mentioned it but I detect some racial overtones in the NCEA working group
wording:
“It includes the following description as part of a
new course: [It promotes discussion and analysis of the ways in which science
has been used to support the dominance of Eurocentric views (among which, its
use as a rationale for colonisation of Maori and the suppression of Maori
knowledge); and the notion that science is a Western European invention and
itself evidence of European dominance over Maori and other indigenous peoples.]
This perpetuates disturbing misunderstandings of science emerging at all levels
of education and in science funding”.
The academic feeding
frenzy took the form of an open letter reply to the Auckland professors. One
copy I came across had 1,738 names as “signatories”. A later copy of the same
letter carried 2,059 “signatories”. The list of vitriol merchants may still be
growing.
To the matter of science
and taniwhas. The Listener (2nd August) interviewed, among others,
Dan Hikuroa a Maori studies lecturer attached to Auckland University. From what
I can make out Mr Hikuroa has been a Maori Science advocate for some time and
might seem to have founded his career on the said subject.
Mr Hikuroa in the
Listener interview referred to the Matata flooding event which occurred in
2005. He contends there is a legend maintaining “that the Waitepuru stream is
occupied by taniwha in the form of a ngarara (lizard)”. The point of this part
of Mr Hikuroa’s story is that local taniwha legend or maybe local knowledge
enabled a number of maraes to be built on safe ground while houses built elsewhere
were washed away.
We might ask if local
legend/knowledge was available and believable why was housing allowed to
progress in the first place? My feeling is that the flooding of 2005 was a
random event, as all flooding events are. Also as in a 1/500 year or more event,
there would not have been anything in the historical record. Reading about the
Matata floods tells us that 300mm of rain fell in a very short time span where
the local people had little opportunity to react. A Google search of Matata
Flooding reveals the sad and devastating scenes. No pictures of taniwha
however. It is probable that the direction of the flooding and location of the
maraes was mere chance and coincidence.
Mr Hikuroa’s advocacy
for Maori Science is much more apparent in the article he presented to the Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand
(16. Nov.2016). The taniwha points he made in the Journal article were
repeated almost verbatim for the Listener interview.
Mr Hikuroa claims via
the Journal article that Maori knowledge has been dismissed as simple myth and
legend. He also maintains that the Maori scientific endeavour began at the
point of Maoris’ first entry to New Zealand. In short Mr Hikuroa claims that
parts of Maori knowledge are science. Quote: “As demonstrated herein, some matauranga
Maori has been generated according to the scientific method, and can therefore
be considered as science”.
That may be true only
insofar as Maori knowledge has been studied, emphasise studied, in modern times
using the scientific method. A scientific method gifted to Maori by
colonialists and western scientists. Pardon me for thinking out loud, but how
much of what today passes for recorded Maori knowledge was encouraged and
inspired by input from the original colonialists? The English/Maori language
exchange had its beginnings more than 200 years ago.
I can follow some of Mr
Hikuroa’s Journal commentary on the background to Maori historical cultural
practices. In the Journal piece his commentary on the Maori calendar is
interesting enough. It is worth noting that many cultures world-wide over millennia
have separately devised numerous rudimentary and sometimes more advanced
calendar systems. All of which does not mean the Maori calendar is science.
Calendars are finally and have been in all respects arithmetical and
observational exercises.
Mathematics and language
are the tools of science and as Maori did not originally have a written
language it becomes more difficult to imagine that Maori could have mastered
the intricacies of the scientific method. Disclosure: I am not a scientist but
I fully understand the need for method and debate.
Mr Hikuroa goes off the
rails badly when he imagines the meandering course of the stream to resemble
both the shape of a lizard and the gyrations of its tail. This is fairy tale
stuff and has no place in a scientific journal which would claim to have scientific
authority and credibility. Could his logic so-called be extended to imply that
all New Zealand waterways are lizard or reptile shaped, and are occupied by
taniwha?
Link to Mr Hihuroa’s Royal Society Journal article
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03036758.2016.1252407
The idea of the Matata taniwha crops up again in a Ministry
of Education document carrying the heading of “Big Ideas of Science” referenced
to Curriculum Level 6. An exact quote from the document: “How is mātauranga
Māori developed and used in deciding where to base settlements? eg. Matatā
taniwha.” Can we detect the hand of, or hear the voice of Mr Hikuroa once more?
One more question: Is Maori religion and spirituality to become part of the curriculum?
The “Big Ideas…” document titled “SC Learning Matrix” is actually a PDF
available as part of this Ministry of Education link:
https://ncea.education.govt.nz/science/science?view=learning
On a first scan of this link it seems the curriculum expects
students to immerse themselves in the Maori world view while simultaneously coming
to grips with real science. The Maori standpoint takes prominence throughout
the link as if science can be taught only through a Maori lens.
Finally I have to say I
am becoming less and less patient with the racial culture war being waged in
New Zealand. What surprised me about the science debate was the racial
direction it took almost instantly. I am sure that was not the intention of the
Auckland professors who being from scientific backgrounds would have welcomed a
reasoned debate.
At every turn we are
being directed to salute Maori culture and not to voice any criticism of Maori
in general. The wider culture is now expected to be continually looking over
its shoulder to be aware of the culture police. The culture police are there to
keep everyone in line so as to ensure the right of way is given to Maori at all
times.
The Maori language is drummed
into us on all fronts it seems. TV, Radio and Print media are gorging
themselves on this false and forced homage. I cringe every time I hear a TV or
radio presenter babble off mouthfuls of untranslated Maori words – many of
which they probably have no understanding of. I don’t understand and I don’t
want to. At some stage I might write up a more detailed criticism of the
culture police - the only descriptive I can think of at present.
10th August 2021
Comments