Two sides of the coin
The idea is breathtakingly simple. It is based on the premise that human society has no sustainable future unless its component parts function together in a balanced harmonious cycle. One example of this is the relationship between the academic disciplines of the natural sciences and the humanities. Pressures to specialise have resulted in a situation where those with access to higher education today are generally channelled towards making a choice between the natural sciences or the humanities. The result is a marked disequilibrium in the value that many of us accord to these two complementary areas of knowledge. The objective of the World Knowledge Dialogue Foundation is to create interfaces between the communities at an international level, and thus to bridge the communication gap between the natural sciences and the humanities, in the hope that each will learn to place the value of its own particular contribution to society, within a larger, more balanced context.
The world today is confronted with major social issues, while the sum of our knowledge is greater and more diverse than it has ever been. If we are to find solutions to problems that affect society on a global scale, such as dramatic changes in climate, population demographics and planetary biodiversity, we must combine our forces to exploit the legacy of knowledge that is handed down to us from the multiplicity of disciplines; from sociology, art, literature, to genetics, physics and economics. The complexity of the problems that confront us today, demand that we take a multidisciplinary approach to resolving them.
The world we live in
Much of the world we live in has become economically dependent upon the need to compete internationally in order to generate more and more individual wealth; Since the Industrial Revolution, this need has been met by technological and scientific enterprise. As a result, the lives of many have become dramatically more comfortable. In some parts of the world, people live significantly longer than they did 200 years ago, and the luxury of appreciating great art, music, literature and culture from all over the world, are freely available to them. However, we are now beginning to appreciate that the need to compete and the need for more innovative technology have been amplified to such an extent that the "knowledge" society is at risk of becoming caught in a feedback loop that it cannot control. The "gap" between the technologically advanced and the technologically disadvantaged parts of society continues to widen and the distribution of financial wealth is becoming increasingly polarised.
To quote Hiroyuki Yoshikawa in his opening address to the meeting, "Technology brings with it both benefits and threats". However dynamic change is a fundamental property of all living systems and we cannot choose to become luddites and try to slowdown or reverse the technology clock. If we did, humankind would soon stagnate. Indeed the laws of evolution forbid it. We must learn to use and to share the benefits of knowledge wisely, or perish.
Time to act
There is growing consensus among representatives of both the natural sciences and of the humanities that unless science and scientists find a way to be reunited as component parts of human society, there will ultimately be little left on this planet to squabble about and no one left to do it. When this endgame will happen is a matter of more conjecture. Perhaps it is many generations ahead and therefore unable to raise our concerns amid all the other urgent problems which surround us. However others believe there is a realistic chance that irremediable global disaster will occur within our own lifetimes or those of our children. Faced with the uncertainty of the timescale, will we panic? Will we put on our intellectual blinkers and plough on regardless?
Will we calmly and "scientifically" accumulate further proofs of concept while the clock ticks on? Or will we try to redress the balance while there is still a choice?
Initiatives to raise science and society's mutual awareness of each other are not particularly new. In countries such as the USA, Japan and across Europe, increasingly more attention is being paid to encouraging scientists to share knowledge with the general public, and to ensure that the research that is funded takes account of societal needs and concerns. There has also been a move to create opportunities that encourage the non-specialist public to show more interest in understanding the ways that science and technology influence their lives. The increase in such initiatives reflects the growing acceptance that issues such as climate change, preservation of biodiversity, population demographics, the emergence of novel diseases, and the polarization of cultural and economic divides are of global importance and demand urgent attention. In this sense, the World Knowledge Dialogue Foundation's initiative shares the same objective as many others. The uniqueness of its goal and its approach, lie in the attempt to encourage multidisciplinary approaches to important issues, by fostering open dialogue between acknowledged intellectual leaders in the fields of the humanities and the natural sciences.
Not just a talking shop
Though it may appear trivial, a spark of hope for the future, has effectively been achieved by putting a group of experts from different domains of science and the humanities in a room for three days and asking them to explain their work, their motivations and their mutual frustrations with each other. The Symposium's speakers share a common trait of transdisciplinary excellence, a rare ability to have straddled the traditional boundaries of study and to have acquired a novel perspective that has enabled each one to open new windows of understanding. The subject areas covered were fascinatingly diverse and the speakers served as catalysts to stimulate and encourage other participants to enter into cross-disciplinary dialogue and widen their own horizons.
Did the experiment work? Did we learn something from it? I think we did. Though perhaps not all of it was what we had expected to learn. Surprisingly, the pitfalls, as well as the basic rules of good dialogue appear to be the same all levels. What applies to young children and university students is also true for Nobel prize winners; drop your preconceptions; drop your jargon; drop your ego; learn the difference between hearing and listening; be prepared to leave your comfort zone and dare to take risks. If we know that, it's because it didn't always work perfectly, but we could feel the difference when we got it right. One thing we know is that the representation and hence the voice of the humanities was not as strong as we would wish.
The paradox within
Perhaps a major lesson to be learned is to identify and acknowledge that there are many paradoxes in our individual thinking even when we find common ground to agree upon. We speak of encouraging young people to be creative and to break the mould. We may imagine our educational institutions as incubators that will churn out "good citizens" for society. We talk of using financial inducements to encourage the brightest and the best to take on the extra effort associated with giving some of their time for "societal" issues, but how many of us were even aware of the presence of the young volunteer conference reporters who donated their own free time to assist at the World Knowledge Dialogue Symposium for the pleasure of learning and helping others. We argue that we need to share the benefits of knowledge across the globe, while at the same time believing we can continue to promote national or at best continent-wide interests. We make no attempt to contradict, and indeed many of us appear convinced by, data suggesting that global catastrophe may occur within our next generation's lifespan, yet our daily behaviour does not suggest we are preparing to make radical changes to our own lifestyles.
The real work begins now
No one expected miracles to occur in the space of three days. The real measure of the value of the World Knowledge Dialogue will be whether we incorporate what we have learnt here into our daily actions. We need to initiate practical ways of building on the momentum that the Symposium has achieved. We should make use of the tools of internet technology to facilitate exchange of our ideas and those of other initiatives to redress the balance between science and society. We must begin to adapt our institutional and governmental approaches to encourage more transdisciplinary learning. Above all, we should not only rely on the provision of such institutions and tools. Each one of us has daily opportunities to search for dialogue at a human level with specialists from other disciplines and to listen to what the rest of society has to teach us. The choice to respond or not lies in our own hands. Putting in place the tools for better interdisciplinary exchange is useless if we do not also push ourselves to use them and remember that the same "rules of the game" apply for the next step. Be humble! There are lessons to be learnt from the most surprising sources.
A symbol of hope
The seven young researchers whose summings up brought the proceedings of first World Knowledge Dialogue Symposium to a close, exemplify our hopes for the future. It is the young who can benefit most from our help in providing them with opportunities to exchange ideas with their counterparts in other disciplines and from other cultures. It is they who are most ready and willing to put their knowledge, their creativity and their wisdom at the service of humanity. They are already forging ahead with practical initiatives to address some of the most urgent and intellectually fascinating problems of modern society.
Where do we go from here?
The World Knowledge Dialogue Symposium has been born. It is a brand new baby, full of hope and promise. Let us choose to nurture and stimulate it and instill it with a sense of responsibility and generosity. For that is the way it can best use its tremendous privilege to give something precious back to society. The path ahead will not be simple and we need to keep on working at opening the lines of communication between different disciplines. At the next World Knowledge Dialogue Symposium in 2008, we will have a first opportunity to evaluate whether our shared experience has enabled us to progress. Whether we choose to regard ourselves as academics in the natural sciences or the humanities, we are but parts of the body of humanity. Our dialogue with the rest of our essential organs should not be a cacophony of cries for attention but rather a co-ordinated effort to excel.
