In praise of the spirit of inquiry
Professor Tan Sri Dato' Dzulkifli Abdul Razak
Learning Curve: Perspective
New Sunday Times - 19-10-2014
A RECENT front page article on the state of research and development in the country published by a Malay tabloid coincided with a story in The Telegraph of UK titled Study for Its Own Sake (Oct 9), which stated that education is “never useless” and can “lead down a glorious path”.
Allan Massie wrote that Aristotle knew the craving for knowledge is no less peculiar than the craving for food, implying that research and development is as routine as eating your meals and there is nothing unusual about it as it is an integral part of academic life. This is in sharp contrast to the local daily’s headline R&D Syok Sendiri.
To top it all, Oxford University vice chancellor Professor Andrew Hamilton, who was provost of Yale from 2004 to 2008, has reportedly spoken up in defence of “apparently useless” study when he allegedly pointed to research by the institution’s Department of Earth Sciences which estimated the body masses of 426 species of dinosaurs. The research is said to have concluded that those with the lowest body mass had the best chance of survival. And accordingly, those did survive and became birds.
So what? This would be the most likely spontaneous response from those who understand research and development in terms of wealth creation (commercialisation), not for knowledge creation which is — first and foremost — the aim of research and development conducted by most tertiary institutions worldwide.
Indeed, knowledge generation is the lifeline, if not the raison d’etre, of universities. Without new knowledge, education in universities can easily be outdated, particularly when the shelf life of knowledge nowadays is becoming increasingly shorter. The pressures posed by commercialisation are relatively new, resulting largely from a new world view that perceives knowledge as tradable commodity. This is made more urgent, given the rising cost of doing research in general. Commercialisation is, therefore, seen as a way to recoup investment — like all business propositions.
In this regard, Hamilton’s response to the “apparently useless” dinosaurs-related research is refreshing. He was quoted as saying: “Now, unless you are a budgerigar wishing to trace your family tree, that information is of precisely zero value. But it’s brilliant research, and somehow I feel better just for knowing it.”
In a sense, this is syok sendiri — but why not? The passion for intense ongoing research is by nature a syok sendiri phenomenon. Indeed, this — and not merely the mighty ringgit sign — drives research and development in many instances.
An eminent Malaysian researcher says almost all commercial products, which are the result of such endeavours, are not owned by the discoverers themselves. And, almost all the time, the discoverers are not the eventual developers or innovators.
In the case of Oxford University back in the day, its dons C. S. Lewis and J. R. R. Tolkien spent hours “poring over Norse and Anglo-Saxon mythology”, drawing condemnation as it was “useless knowledge”.
Fast forward to today and the so-called “useless knowledge” is a money-spinner as a result of the books that they wrote, enabling other industries to flourish alongside.
The Malaysian version of this is perhaps is the “apparently useless” study of the Perak Man which to, all intents and purposes, has no commercial value per se in the materialistic, tangible sense. At one point, Universiti Sains Malaysia wanted to stop the research. But it is no less brilliant research that we, too, feel better knowing its findings. The value is, no doubt, inherent in the knowledge that emerges from it and, in this case, it is in itself invaluable — no amount of money can buy it! Indeed the findings have put Malaysia and its researchers on the map as point of references in the field of pre-historical research in the region and the world. We now understand better our position in the scheme of things as far as humanity is concerned.
Perhaps it is time to look at research and development beyond the restricted confines of commercialisation — in the context of profit and loss as a business venture — but rather to appreciate it from the perspective of pushing the boundaries of knowledge for the benefit of the global repository of knowledge that we can draw upon.
In the final analysis, Massie stated: “The spirit of inquiry is to be valued for its own sake, irrespective of where it leads.”