The-Two-Cultures

TheTwoCulturesC.P.Snow1“It’sratherodd,”saidG.H.Hardy,oneafternoonintheearlyThirties,“butwhenwehearaboutintellectualsnowadays,itdoesn’tincludepeoplelikemeandJ.J.ThomsonandRutherford.”Hardywasthefirstmathematicianofhisgeneration,J.J.Thomsonthefirstphysicistofhis;asforRutherford,hewasoneofthegreatestscientistswhohaveeverlived.Somebrightyoungliteraryperson(Iforgettheexactcontext)puttingthemoutsidetheenclosurereservedforintellectualsseemedtoHardythebestjokeforsometime.Itdoesnotseemquitesuchagoodjokenow.Theseparationbetweenthetwocultureshasbeengettingdeeperunderoureyes;thereisnowpreciouslittlecommunicationbetweenthem,littlebutdifferentkindsofincomprehension1anddislike.2Thetraditionalculture,whichis,ofcourse,mainlyliterary,isbehavinglikeastatewhosepowerisrapidlydeclining—standingonitsprecarious2dignity,spendingfartoomuchenergyonAlexandrianintricacies,[1]occasionallylettingflyinfitsofaggressivepique3quitebeyonditsmeans,[2]toomuchonthedefensive4toshowanygenerousimaginationtotheforces,whichmustinevitablyreshapeit.Whereasthescientificcultureisexpansive,notrestrictive,confidentattheroots,themoreconfidentafteritsbout5ofOppenheimerianself-criticism,certainthathistoryisonitsside,impatient,intolerant,andcreativeratherthancritical,good-naturedandbrash6.Neithercultureknowsthevirtuesoftheother;oftenitseemstheydeliberatelydonotwanttoknow.[3]Theresentment,whichthetraditionalculturefeelsforthescientific,isshadedwithfear;fromtheotherside,theresentmentisnotshadedsomuchasbrimming7withirritation.Whenscientistsarefacedwithanexpressionofthetraditionalculture,ittends(toborrowMr.WilliamCooper’seloquentphrase)tomaketheirfeetache.3Itdoesnotneedsayingthat[4]generalizationsofthiskindareboundtolooksillyattheedges.Thereareagoodmanyscientistsindistinguishablefromliterarypersons,andviceversa.Eventhestereotypegeneralizationsaboutscientistsaremisleadingwithoutsomesortofdetail—e.g.,thegeneralizationthatscientistsasagroupstandonthepoliticalLeft.Thisisonlypartlytrue.Averyhighproportionofengineersisalmostasconservativeasdoctors;ofpurescientists;thesamewouldapplytochemists.ItisonlyamongphysicistsandbiologiststhatonefindstheLeftinstrength.Ifonecomparedthewholebodyofscientistswiththeiroppositenumbersofthetraditionalculture(writers,academics,andsoon),thetotalresultmightbeafewpercent,moretowardstheLeftwing,butnotmorethanthat.[5]Nevertheless,asafirstapproximation,thescientificcultureisrealenough,andsoisitsdifferencefromthetraditional.Foranyonelikemyself,byeducationascientist,bycallingawriter,atonetimemovingbetweengroupsofscientistsandwritersinthesameevening,thedifferencehasseemeddramatic.4Thefirstthing,impossibletomiss,isthatscientistsareontheupandup;theyhavethestrengthofasocialforcebehindthem.IftheyareEnglish,theysharetheexperiencecommontousall—ofbeinginacountryslidingeconomicallydownhill—butinaddition(andtomanyofthemitseemspsychologicallymoreimportant)theybelongtosomethingmorethanaprofession,tosomethingmorelikeadirectingclassofanewsociety.[6]Inasenseoddlydivorcedfrompolitics,theyarethenewmen.Eventhesteadiestandmostpoliticallyconservativeofscientificveterans,[7]lurking8indignityintheircolleges,hassomekindoflinkwiththeworldtocome.Theydonothateitastheircolleaguesdo;partoftheirmindisopentoit;[8]almostagainsttheirwill,thereisaresidualglimmerofkinshipthere.TheyoungEnglishscientistsmayanddocursetheirluck;increasinglytheyfret9abouttherigiditiesoftheiruniversities,abouttheossification10ofthetraditionalculturewhich,tothescientists,makestheuniversitiescoldanddead;theyviolentlyenvytheirRussiancounterpartswhohavemoneyandequipmentwithoutdiscernible11limit,whohavethewholefieldwideopen.Butstilltheystayprettyresilient12:thesamesocialforcesweepsthemon.HarwellandWinscalehavejustasmuchspiritasLosAlamosandChalkRiver:theneatpettybourgeoishouses,thetoughandcleveryoung,thecrowdsofchildren:theyaresymbols,frontiertowns.5Thereisatouchofthefrontierqualities,infact,aboutthewholescientificculture.Itstoneis,forexample,steadilyheterosexual.ThedifferenceinsocialmannersbetweenHarwellandHampsteadorasfarasthatgoesbetweenLosAlamosandGreenwichVillage,wouldmakeananthropologistblink.[9]Aboutthewholescientificculture,thereisanabsence—surprisingtooutsiders—ofthefeline13andoblique14.Sometimesitseemsthatscientistsrelish15speakingthetruth,especiallywhenitisunpleasant.Theclimateofpersonalrelationsissingularlybracing16,nottosayharsh:itstrikesbleaklyonthoseunusedtoit,whosuddenlyfindthat[10]thescientists’wayofdecidingonactionisbyafull-dressargument,withnoregardforsensibilitiesandnoholdsbarred17.Nobodyofpeopleeverbelievedmoreindialecticastheprimarymethodofattainingsense;[11]andifyouwantapictureofscientistsintheiroff-moments,itcouldbejustoneofaknock-about18argument.Undertheargumentthereglitteregotismsasrapacious19asanyofours:but,unlikeours,theegotismsaredrivenbyacommonpurpose.6Howmuchofthetraditionalculturegetsthroughtothem?Theanswerisnotsimple.Agoodmanyscientists,includingsomeofthemostgifted,havethetastesofliterarypersons,readthesamethings,andleadasmuch.Broadly,though,[12]theinfiltration20ismuchless.His