POINCARÉ: The Value of Science

In The Value of Science, Henri Poincaré makes the observation that “most men do not love to think.” Most men do not love to work either but they still do it because they have to pay the bills. That’s not so with thinking. Thinking is more like cleaning out the attic. It’s something we can let slide for a day or two, or even for another twenty or thirty years for that matter. Therefore, Poincaré points out that “It is needful then to think for those who love not thinking.” Since there are so many of us who love not thinking the question is: who should do the thinking? The philosopher Plato addressed this question long ago and for him the answer was obvious: philosophers are best equipped to do this sort of thing. But Poincaré was a scientist. Who did he believe should be in charge of the hard thinking? You don’t even have to read the book to guess the answer.

That doesn’t necessarily mean Poincaré is wrong. He makes a good case that scientists should do the really hard thinking in society. He also believes that the value of science goes far beyond our everyday needs (which is, incidentally, precisely the same argument Plato makes for philosophy). Poincaré says “The scientist does not study nature because it is useful; he studies it because he delights in it, and he delights in it because it is beautiful.” Then he goes on to describe in more detail just what he means by beauty: “I mean that profounder beauty which comes from the harmonious order of the parts and which a pure intelligence can grasp.” That’s not how most of us define beauty. This definition has a certain Platonic intellectual ring to it and Poincaré openly declares that “intellectual beauty is sufficient unto itself.” Plato himself couldn’t have said it better. We should pursue science for its own sake, not for what we get out of it. It’s an end in itself because it’s both beautiful and inspiring.

But that’s not enough for most folks. Beauty and inspiration are ok but they also want what is called, in modern terminology, a better return on their investment. So Poincaré gets practical and makes the sales pitch that “this disinterested quest of the true for its own beauty is sane also and able to make man better.” Now we’re getting somewhere. Anything that can not only give psychological health but also make us better men is bound to appeal to the practical side of Americans.

The problem is Poincaré’s fanatical devotion to scientific study for its own sake. He has no doubt whatsoever that “The search for truth should be the goal of our activities…” He’s probably right. We should search for truth. It makes us better men and psychologically healthy. But there are other things in life besides studying science. The scientist/philosopher Pascal says that “God alone is man’s true good.” Science is important to Pascal too but he sets a different value on it than Poincaré. Pascal did some hard thinking himself and believed that the goal of our activities should be the salvation of our souls. As Pascal puts it: “when I survey the whole universe...and man left to himself…what will become of him when he dies…I am moved to terror.” For Poincaré this is a non-issue. As far as he’s concerned “geologic history shows us that life is only a short episode between two eternities of death…Thought is only a gleam in the midst of a long night.” When it’s time for us to leave this old world behind, that’s it. It’s lights out. Forever. So much for life in this world. But since we’re here now we should make the best of it and think about what it all means. Science helps us think harder. So do art and music. And for those who do not love to think there’s always baseball and golf.

-- RDP