Science and Boredom

One the problems of science is that much of what is scientifically interesting is in actuality extremely humanly boring. We can gain insights, get closer to the truth, learn something about the world, gather and even create knowledge - by doing very mundane simple things that are neither innovative nor novel, that are time consuming and cumbersome and in many instances - plainly dull.

Say somebody developed an interesting system of gathering and categorizing information about a certain type of human behavior. Say that she or he did it about fifty years ago and that _then_ it was innovative, exciting and groundbreaking. Since then, many have discussed this system, criticized and reconstructed it. With fifty years of improvement and discussion, it has become standard. So much have been said of it, it's hard to say add anything without repeating. Applications are abundant and though each researcher tweaks with it a little bit and thinks he or she reinvented the world, it has been standardized to great extent.

Now, it is probably very easy to criticize this mainstream method. Its many usages and past criticism only make it easier. It's disadvantages are well known - just find your favourite tree and bark at it. Whilst easy to criticize, the method is probably not easily improved. So much has been done that apart from minor improvements, which may require much effort, and local adjustments - it is unclear what more can be done.

Nevertheless, it is probably useful to keep applying the same method over and over again. History, to use a platitude, never stops. The while spent learning and developing the method has probably produced many new instances worth while exploring with it. Things happen all the time, and we want to continue learning about them. It is a never-ending process which can be justified with any given, productive method. Developments in technologies may help us use the same method on a larger scale, with more people and events and so forth. We can reapply the method in different places, in different times, dig into the history or depict the ever-changing present. And these applications will not be innovative - nothing more needs to be invented. This does not mean that it will be easily or that the people who do it need not be smart; even with the best hammer at hand, an incompetent housekeeper will hit his or her own finger. And it hurts. Not just the finger.

Of course, some may say that there should be a division of labour - some scientists should reinvent the methods and theories while others, 'worker' scientists, should apply and reapply, adjust and accommodate as needed. The problem with this fine idea is that most people would consider themselves the innovators, in the same way most people think they have more sense of humour than the average person. Or perhaps, I just don't go out of my bubble enough.