Sensitivity and Cross Culture Science 1
328-1640
THE NEED Of SENSITIVITY IN SCIENCE:
—As the foundation of
Cross-Cultural Science Education—
“Science sets forth this formative process in all its detail and
necessity, exposing the mature configuration of everything which
has been reduced to a moment and property of Spirit. The goal is
Spirit’s insight into what knowing is. ”
[Hegel: Phenomenology Of Spirit. 1807.]
1. That what we usually think as “Science” is “Power Science”
and lacks Sensitivity.
The image of Powerful Science bulldozing through problems
and resistances to get things done is very strong in our mind.
And, therefore, it is hard to talk about “Sensitivity” as an
important element in Science.
Occasionally we do talk about beauty, poetry in science,
such as Fabre’s The Diary of Insects, and Einstein’s Cosmic
Vision. But, I am afraid, we tell such stories as “diversions”
from the main instructional materials. Perhaps we tell more jokes
of dubious value to entertain students more frequently than
telling about the “sensitive” tender elements in Science.
By and large we treat the sensitivity in Science as of
secondary importance. As a consequence, teaching practices of
Science tend to be that of imposing the Powerful Science on the
minds of students. We may not be conscious of us doing that. But
if we step back and look at our practices, it appears that we are
teaching Power side of Science almost exclusively and neglecting
I think it is unfortunate, for the creative thinking, the
sensitivity is essential. Even if the majority of human
population has to perform mechanical routines to make a living,
our children deserve an educational period where they are treated
with the delicacy of the Sensitive Science. For that reason, I
would try here a “scientific explanation” of
Sensitivity and Cross Culture Science 2
the Sensitivity, is a rational to stress the importance of it in
Science. I hope, my explanation is sufficiently general to
encourage Sensitivity in human life in general.
And, I have a feeling that what I meant by Sensitivity also
has some meaning to the Cross Cultural Education. Since I am not
familiar with the Cross Cultural Education that experts here are
engaged, I do not make a claim. Rather, I would like to ask you
if what I am going to discuss here has any relevance to the Cross
Cultural Education. I would be grateful if you kindly give me
back responses and reactions to what I said.
2. Where can Sensitivity be located in our Intelligence?
In order to introduce the Sensitivity, let me talk briefly
about “Science” in general. To save time, I present a simplified
archeological diagram here.
Science is a part of human intelligence to use the
faculties of our brain/mind.
(i) The first level of intelligence on the surface is Object
Recognition level. This is what Atomism does. We recognize
objects and identify them. We sometimes decide to ignore things
as well at this level.
(ii) The second level is Relation Recognition level. There we
think of relations between Objects. Statistical Correlations,
Causal linkages may be recognized and identified. Basically, the
relations recognized are of the “Linear” kind. [*See Subnote 1.]
(iii) The third level is Utility Recognition level. We sense what
we can do with the objects and relations we recognized.
(iv) The fourth level is Strategic Construction. This is often
referred to as “Problem Solving” intelligence. We take the
situation at hand as the starting point, and see the desired
state as the final point. If we find “The Means” to connect these
two points, we call it “The Solution” of the problem.
As such, the fourth level resembles the second level,
except that the “Connection” (Relation) is imposed by us. And,
often times, the task of finding the “means” to connect the two
points is accomplished by ignoring and cutting off relations that
existed. The image for this “problem
Sensitivity and Cross Culture Science 3
solving” is Alexander The Great cutting a knotted ball of string
with a sword in one blow. The sword is the imposed connection
cutting through all pre-existing relations. Unfortunately, this
happened too many times when a powerful dominant Culture met
In these 4 levels, there is no need of the Sensitivity.
Rather, we would think of the “Minimum” that is necessary for
what is desired. We deem that is “Efficient” and “Rational”
within the contexts considered.
For example, we recognize two towns on both sides of a
mountain. That is at the Object Recognition level. We see people
going back and forth between the two towns. This is the Relation
Recognition level of thinking. We see the Utility of the
exchanges. And we Bulldoze to make a Highway between them and
think that the problem is solved.
The “Science” in our ordinary sense is an organized and
formalized “knowledge” at the above 4 levels of intelligence. It
empowers people in that sense. Let me call this Power Science. It
lets us do things. But there are levels below this, if we dig
into our minds deeper.
(v) Although we seldom think any deeper than the Power Science
levels, we occasionally do “Think Twice”. We ask whether or not
the construction of the Highway was a good thing. Let me call
this 5th level intelligence as the “Reflective Level”.
We do have this intellectual capacity to “Think Twice”
about what we have done, and also sometimes what we are about to
do. That is where the Sensitivity comes in. Although we have the
Power to do and to get a certain thing that we desire, we ask
ourselves if doing so might not hurt someone. We exercise a care
to protect other’s safety, interests, wellbeing. This takes a
fair amount of imagination as to the situations that we are about
This requires thinking of the whole system of things in a
complex web of relations. It is different from the kind of
thinking of Power science which can be metaphored as that of
“Drawing a line from a point A to a point B”. For, in the complex
web of relations, there are lines from the point B to the other
point C, which in turn relates to other points. All linked in
that sense, the circle of the linkage most likely comes back to
the initial point A. That complicates the situation. A
straightforward thinking is only applicable
Sensitivity and Cross Culture Science 4
to linking nearby points. The whole circle of relation is not
“straightforward”, but rather “Non-Linear”. That makes thinking
[Linear/ Non-Linear distinction is explained in Subnote 1.]
But the strange thing is that Humans do have an intuitive
sense by which they can “Feel” the harmony or disharmony of the
whole system. Even in highly theoretical works, physicists often
came to “Feel” the whole thing and said it is a “Poetical
Beauty”, or “Poetical Unity”.
That is the “Care” that one exercises to understand the
whole of the cyclic relationships and the “Beauty” that one feels
about the whole are related.
I think it is highly desirable that children are given the
opportunity to experience the “Care” and “Beauty”. It requires
Sensitivity to experience it. But the Sensitivity cannot be
developed without experiencing it. I think this is a great
challenge of Science Education.
I would like to suggest that Science Education has to aim
at the caring level of intelligence. And I think it is possible
to lead students to that level by asking them to “Think Twice” as
often as possible. The Science Education has to contain exercises
for saying “I can do this But on the other hand…” Such exercises
are training for Sensitivity.
We might call this “The Sensitivity Science Education”, in
a contrast to the “Power Science Education” that we have been
And I hope that they enjoy seeing the “Beauty” attained
after many exercises of “Thinking Twice”.
3. The Sensitivity Science is a “Pragmatic” necessity for
Human Survival, and Cross Cultural Science Education is a
beautiful way of the Sensitivity Science Education.
In view of what we are doing nowadays to our Environment
and to our fellow Human beings, I would say that without
Sensitivity, we will not survive the 21st century. For the
sensitive eyes, the bad consequences of the Power Science are
visible almost everywhere. Even if we do not want to see them,
things such as Acid Rains descend
Sensitivity and Cross Culture Science 5
upon us. Incidences such as Chernobyl happens and force us to
know what we are doing to ourselves.
In the line-like thinking of Power Science, we do not see
the remote consequences of our actions. But the fruits of our
deeds loop around and come back on ourselves.
In that, I am not a Romantic Idealist to advocate the
Sensitivity Science. I have a “Pragmatic” concern about the
future of the World in which our children live or die. Either we
educate ourselves and change to become Caring Beings, or we
annihilate ourselves. It is not possible to evade the choice.
Fortunately, however, we have a marvelous educational
opportunity called Cross Cultural Education.
It gives very good opportunity to Think Twice about the
Power Science that our dominant Culture has been practicing up to
The Cross Cultural Education is one way of giving our
children the opportunity, and a beautiful way of doing the
Sensitivity Science Education. Here, remarkably, we have a
consistency of the means and the aim. We have the way of studying
which cal1s for Sensitivity. And we have the aim that is the
I look upon Cross Cultural Education to be not a “Tokenism”
to satisfy disgruntled minority races, or “Window Dressing” to
soothe the “Guilt” from the colonial oppressions and the racial
discrimination in the historical past. But I consider it as a
Golden Opportunity for every one to learn the way of Survival and
at the same time the way of constructing a beautifu1 Future.
Beyond that, I would like to stress here that this is not a
subject of “social studies”, but of “Science”.
I am not saying this because I am a scientist and wanted to
externalize the power of science. You must realize that I am a
“scientist” only in the Power Science. Among other things it was
the prejudice of the “Power Science” that used to say that Euro
Americans have the Science.
And, I have to learn Cross Cultural Science for my own
sake. And people here are great help to me. I wish I could go
back to school again and experience beautiful education that you
Sensitivity and Cross Culture Science 6
– – – – – – – –
I add one, perhaps, “Bad” example for the advocacy of Cross
Cultural Science Education. It is from General Relativity.
General Relativity can be viewed as an “art” of how to
connect a small local Linear way of thinking (analogous to making
a short sentence) to the next. The connections of many small
Linear descriptions (analogous to a whole “story” made of many
sentences) make up a Global Geometry which may be “Non-linear”.
General Relativity is concerned with the Whole of the Global
Connections. Needless to say, to make a comprehensible coherent
picture is not a trivial task. Some constructions are beautiful,
The “connected whole” is a “World View”. And among many
ways to make up the “connected whole(s)”, we can study how to
compare various ways of making “connected wholes”. In this sense,
General Relativity is interesting. It resembles “Cross Cultural”
However, as I said before, General Relativity is “perhaps a
bad example”. The trouble with this example from modern physics
is that it is by and large inaccessible to the general public.
There are “popular books” such as The Turning Point by F.
Capra etc. However, ordinary Science Education does not come
anywhere near to the “Way of Thinking” contained in those modern
developments in science. Schools, perhaps unconsciously, teach
the 300 year old physics and waste time in “beating the
established mechanical routines into blank minds of children”
under the name of Science Education. It so happens that the Old
Science also carries the Authoritarian Ideology of that
It also represents the “Alienated” mentality of the 19th
century European Intellectuals. [see] M. Berman. The
Reenchantment of The World.] That Science emerged in the 17th
century as a “Liberation of Thinking” is largely forgotten and
perverted, under the disguise of “Rigorous”, “Exact”, discipline.
Psychoanalysts ought to examine why so many scientists and
science teachers today still maintain the illusion of “rigorous,
exact science” as if they have never heard of the Uncertainty
Principle or Godel’s proof of Incompleteness of Mathematics.
Their quasi-religious belief may be within the Freedom of Belief
allowed by the Constitution, but the Authoritarian posture of
scientists talking down to the
Sensitivity and Cross Culture Science 7
public, as if they are the guardians of the Absolute Truth, is a
pedagogical disaster in barring the majority population from
access to the modern science.
That I have a considerable difficulty in talking about
fruits of the modern science in terms of “Ways of Thinking”
attests to the failure in Physics Education for which we
physicists are collectively responsible. We have spent Hundreds
of Billion Dollars of tax money, but we have not helped society
with cultural developments in terms of the Ways of Thinking. The
public money is used to edify a small group of specialists and
widen the gap of thinking inequality, not mentioning the North-
South disparity in science-technology and wealth. We ought to
think, for example, why we do not use science to make rudimental
water supply systems available to the poor half of Humanity. It
could be done at a fraction of the cost of sending a school
teacher to Space and getting killed in a Show of National
Superiority. I do not think it is excusable.
One very inexpensive way of introducing New Way of Thinking
to general public is to do Cross Cultural Science. Since most of
the “Sciences” from different cultures are accessible through
non-technical expressions, they are better suited for general
Education. (I fancy that “Hopi Relativity” is just as good in
conveying the main idea as General Relativity which is accessible
only through complicated mathematical manipulations.) That is to
say, we have discovered a mountain of treasures in the Native
Science. I recommend school teachers to seriously look into
Native Science and take advantages of the treasure.
(However, I would caution the teachers to pay proper respect in
exchange, lest be accused of stealing the last and the most
precious treasures of the Natives after taking everything away
from them. One way of expressing respect is to invite Native
Scientists and let them speak, rather than giving an
“Interpretation” to students as if that is genuine Native
Science. And if possible, let students learn from the way the
Natives live with the “Science in their actual life, rather than
substituting an “intellectualized version” for it.)
– – – – – – – –
My story here was perhaps tedious and technical and it was
from the background of the Power Science. But I hope it is of
Thank you for your patient listening.
Sensitivity and Cross Culture Science 8
[Subnote 1. On Linearity.
“Linear” means “line-like”. When relations between pairs of
two quantities, such as “Input and Output” plotted on a graph
paper appear like lines, the relations are called Linear.
Most relations in Reality, however, are not Linear. Why,
then, do we favor Linearity? The most theories in science are
Linear ones. Economists use Linearized models; Political
Scientists and Politicians talk and think in Linear Language. We
usually think Linear, such as if something is good, then more of
it is better. It is not rare that sick people take more pills,
thinking that the more pills he or she takes, the faster the cure
is, then ends up with an Overdose. Or a man who makes hundred
thousand dollars a year thinking that he would be a twice bigger
man if he could make $200,000 etc.
But, the worship of Linearity is not just silly
superstition in numbers. There is a definite advantage in
Linearity. I cite an example.
Suppose a psychologist or social scientist is faced with an
unknown entity or system named, say, G. How will the scientist go
about knowing what G is?
The first principle of Science is the Principle of “Do
something and see what will happen”.
So the scientist does something, which in psychologist’s
jargon is called “Stimulus”. Sociologists might call it “Input”.
Something happens in Response (X) to the Stimulus (x), or Output
corresponding to the Input. By this, the scientist gets a data
(X) = {G} (x) or x → X
Of course this one data point is not enough for the
scientist to claim “Knowledge” on the entity. The scientists have
to try more Inputs and get Outputs. But if the entity (or system)
is Linear, it is easier to know what Response would be for any
Stimulus. For example, the Linear Entity G would produce a
Response 2X for Stimulus 2x, and 3X for 3x, and so on, i.e.;
Sensitivity and Cross Culture Science 9
What is more, provided the Entity (System) G is Linear, the
scientist can predict what the Response (Output) would be for an
arbitrary combination of various kinds of Stimulus, say like
(3X + 2Y – Z) = {G} (3x + 2y – z).
This predictability is an enormous savings in the cost of
the research to construct the Knowledge about the Entity (System)
Having this sense of Linearity in mind, one looks into
texts in Physics, Engineering, Economics, etc. One would find
that the majority of Theories are about Linear entities or linear
systems. Texts in Psychology, Sociology, Political Science,
Anthropology etc. are not explicit in what they mean by
“knowledge”. But when they do imply “knowledge”, they are usually
an implicit assumption of Linearity.
Most economic-politico-social policy recommendations from
the Power Science are of the Patch-work type which in effect says
“Granting that all other things stay constant, do x to get the
result X”. This is only justifiable on Linearity Assumption. The
characteristic of Linear Thinking is that it neglects all
complications. It only sees the starting point (the problem as
the initial state) and the desired end point, and finds the means
to connect the two points. It is like drawing a line between two
points without looking at other points around. Perhaps, it is
analogous to shooting an arrow at a target. As such, the
concentration of attention is necessary and it is not a bad thing
In real systems, however, when one thing is changed, all
others change. There would always be the second, third, fourth
order effects, like the ripples created by a stone dropped in a
lake. Linear Assumption is simple and convenient, but it is a bad
“superstition”, if it is worshiped as The Best Science. Yet the
Insensitivity of the Power Science neglects the higher order
Another trick of the Power Science is that, when the
uncertainties in the higher order effects are visible, it goes
for “Short Term” projections and makes decisions on that basis.
It is hoped that the higher order effects would not manifest in a
short time scale taken as the reference frame of the thinking.
Unfortunately, the neglected higher order effects do not
disappear; they “disappear” only in the short-term thinking.
People have to pay for them eventually. A funny thing about this
Sensitivity and Cross Culture Science 10
is “scientific”. That is the Power Science; it provides an
edifying cover not only for the negligence, arrogance, and
insensitivity, but for the stupidity. I would think that the
Native Science which thinks on a long-term scale would be good
“medicine” for the Power Science.
Non-linear entities or systems are that which cannot be
treated by Linear Theory. That is the definition. Non-linear
entities and systems are nasty, for they defy the simple
“predictability” of the kind illustrated above.
Non-linear systems are “Unpredictable”, which means there
is no possibility of doing the “science” which usually means
“predicting power”. Of course, we can do a modified sense of
“science”. In fact, non-linear physics is now getting
fashionable, where things like “Catastrophe Phenomena” are
What is so-called “Ecology” in biology and geology is
largely confined to Linear cases. Some Biologists and Geologists
are aware that Nature is Non-linear and Catastrophic Instability
— such as mass extinction — is expected. But the prejudice
(or rather “superstition”) of majority of the scientists
demanding “Predictability” for “science” on some emotional ground
does not make the study of Non-Linearity in Nature popular.
As to knowledge in social and Humane areas, their implicit
Linear “Rhetoric” are yet to be recognized. “Causal Relation” is
often nothing more than a Linearized Expression. As a
consequence, people do not know they are assuming Linearity.
Hence, Linear Thinking is prevalent.
I do not think the “Linguistic Philosophers” are even aware
of Non-linearity, except perhaps in Logical Paradoxes. (The
“Paradox of Self-Reference” has a “loop structure” and as such it
is Non-linear. “Circular Argument” is also Non-linear. They
reject it. But interestingly the most “definitions” in sciences
are “circular”. Newton’s Laws of Motion and Darwin’s famous
statement “Survival of the Fittest” are well known examples.
Perhaps, because of these bad cases, philosophers do not like
Non-Linearity, But, their dislike prevents them from serious
studies of Non-Linearity. This is unfortunate.)
However, the Philosophy of Dialectics is a Non-linear one. [See
Thorn cited below] But I doubt Dialecticians themselves such as
Marx — are aware of the Non-linearity.
Sensitivity and Cross Culture Science
As to Mathematics of Non-Linearity, see Rene Thom: Structural
Stability and Morphogenesis. Benjamin. 1972. (Thom also had an
interesting thing to say about Math Education, Science 1972.)
Also, there are several texts on Non-Linear Physics. What
is called “Solution” is an unusually stable wave produced by Non-
Linearity. It is to be noted that “Stability” can be a
manifestation of Non-linearity. Non-linearity is not always
unstable and catastrophic. I suspect almost all biological and
social systems (such as human life) is “stable” because of Non-
linearity. They “die”, however, because of the Non-linearity that
maintained them to be stable for a while (quasi-stable).
The escalation of Nuclear Arms race which goes in a
“vicious circle” is an example of bad Non-linear Dynamics. On the
other hand, the “positive enforcement” effects in Education etc.
are also Non-linear Dynamics.
These examples show that Non-Linearity is important and
interesting. But here again, it is too technical to be taught
directly in schools. I would appreciate very much if you could
suggest to me some ways of bringing “awareness” of Non-Linearity
into school science education. Interestingly “Sensitivity” is a
highly Non-Linear Phenomenon. I wish some psychologists would
write about “Non-Linear Dynamics of Mind”. Hegel came close to
doing that, but his intellectual snobbism is too much for popular
reading. Perhaps, Native Science might have good stories to tell
Oct.18, ’87. S. Kounosu Phys. Dept. U. of L.