Mimetic Minima

Tuesday, 29 November 2011 06:54

Written by Louie C. Montemar

Aristotle called us humans homo politicus—the political animal. Arendt labeled us homo faber—man the creator-toolmaker. Whatever sentiment one holds for oneself, in this age of globalization and the Internet, one thing is clear and is becoming more so by the day: we are creatures of knowledge. We are homo sapiens indeed, the knowing animal.

This knowledge that we possess does not come from thin air, however. It is not simply storable in just any vessel. It is also, certainly, neither retrievable nor utilizable at a mere moment’s notice by just any literate creature. As knowledge becomes even more abstract, complex, specialized, and simply overwhelming due to sheer volume, we need more and more learned citizens who can directly tap, develop, and render utilizable such body of knowledge. Hence society’s growing need for intellectuals, scientists and technicians—and, may I say, at the least, science-literate citizens.

Scientific literacy is one gauge by which the development or progress of a people is assessed. If innovation and sustainability are key concerns in national development, we must be able to maintain a modicum of cerebral wealth or cultural capital in our country. This would mean determining, producing, and maintaining a needed number of intellectuals, scientists and technical personnel working with and for our communities. In other words, societies need what I propose to call here, borrowing from biologist Richard Dawkins, a “mimetic minima.”

It was only in 1976 that Richard Dawkins coined the term “meme,” purposively crafting it to rhyme with gene. A meme is a “unit of culture” — knowledge, information or practices — that could be stored, copied, innovated upon, or passed on from one social actor or generation to another. Complex scientific knowledge, seen as a meme or a memeplex (a “complex meme”), is not as transferrable or accessible as other units of culture. Society needs science specialists for the purpose. Hence, I argue the need for maintaining a mimetic minima — that minimum number of particular sets of science practitioners and scholars that a society needs to be able to, at the least, continue maintaining its current level of technological development.

Government recognizes that we need more science professionals for unlike other economies, ours is supported by a proportionately smaller number of scientists and technologists. On this alone, one can anchor the import of determining a mimetic minima. How many and what kinds of scientists do we really need in this country? We need agricultural technologists, certainly, but how many and how do we really produce them?

Given the continuously increasing import that science is gaining in the global order, the need is highlighted for setting such a mimetic minima. This may help underscore the tragedy that many of our best scientific minds opt to go out of the country after earning their degrees here or to stay abroad where they may have studied for their higher learning — the continuing brain drain. Corollary to this, we have those who have gone out since the 1960’s and do not find any support and encouragement to go back to and invest in the country — suggesting our government’s limited and limiting past attempts at boosting brain gain through projects like the Balik Scientist Program of the Department of Science and Technology (DOST).

I do commend however DOST’s current initiatives to support more science scholars and the Department of Education’s very recent attempts at establishing more “science high schools” or, more precisely perhaps, “high schools with a science-oriented curriculum,” like my alma mater Manila Science High School.

From the 1970’s to the early 2000’s we often only heard of two supposed science high schools, Manila Science and the Philippine Science — Masay and Pisay as we fondly refer to them. The students of these two learning institutions consistently top the college-level aptitude assessments in the country. However, it must be pointed out that, actually, Masay is not a “special science high school” like Pisay for it does not have official governmental recognition of being a special public science program and that more importantly, unlike Pisay, it does not have a specific annual budgetary allocation from national government.

Masay is a “public high school with a science-oriented curriculum” mainly supported by the DEPED but with highly selective student screening mechanisms in the form of a very exacting entrance examination and a particularly demanding grade retention requirement of 83%. Regular public schools only set a 75% passing rate.

DEPED now wants to have more Masays and Pisays. It must be pointed out, however, that there really have been other so-called science high schools aside from Masay and Pisay before DEPED launched its program to set up more centers of science learning at the secondary education level. For instance, there is a Maksay in Makati, a Marisay in Marikina, and a Quesay in Quezon City. I suppose there could be a Tiwasay in say Tiwi, Albay, or a Lupasay in Lupao, Nueva Ecija, soon?

Joking aside, a serious question is where are most of the products of Masay and Pisay of the last four decades? These educands, arguably, were the cream of the academic crop of their respective generations. Where have all these flowers gone and where will the new blooms go — where will the growing number of new science scholars go after graduating from the supposedly “better” high schools? Oh, do I hear some of you whispering to yourselves “St. Luke’s and the Philippine Medical Association?” That should be a good topic for another issue perhaps: science professionals, politics and ethics.

As a product of a science high school, I have been reflecting on the notion of a mimetic minima for quiet some time now as I have seen many of our science-inclined scholars ending up as being nothing more than consumers and slaves of commerce and not as the scientific entrepreneurs or innovators that we once hoped and actually trained them to be. It pains me to realize, from a certain perspective, that the public and collective support given to their education when they were young may have been wasted, with many of them becoming non-scientists and basing themselves abroad, some even changing their nationalities “for the sake of family.” Now think, whose GDP or GNP are they beefing up now with their intellectual prowess and productivity?

Manila Science High School’s motto is “Science, Truth, Country.” But sadly, looking at the reality of where most of us from my batch ended up, one might reckon that the real batch motto seems to have been “Sayang, Family in Another Country.” My generation of learners may best be described as not homo politicus, not homo faber and not homo sapiens, but mostly homo migrantes. The truth hurts, it is said. I prefer to say, objective reality bites — science pun intended.

Let us reconsider the country’s broad need for scientists or science practitioners. If we want this government’s Matuwid na Daan to go anywhere real and meaningful, we need a clearer policy on science for national development in this country. Top of my mind, I see that we need an enhanced Balik Scientist Program, better support and recognition for the work of Filipino innovators and inventors, and industries that will make effective, maximal, and relevant use of our nation’s cultural capitals.
In short, we need to have a memetic minima, and much, much more.

Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites