Wednesday, April 1, 2015 // The Statement
3B
An interview with former Congressman Rush Holt
The following is an interview with
Rush Holt conducted during the
Jerome B. Wiesner Symposium on
Strengthening the Roles of Universi-
ties in National Science Policymak-
ing. Holt is currently chief executive
officer of the American Association
for the Advancement of Science.
Before taking over this role in Feb-
ruary, he served sixteen years in the
U.S. House of Representatives (NJ–
12). In Congress, he was a proponent
for the advancement of science and
technology policies. He also held a
faculty appointment at Swarthmore
College as a professor of physics and
public policy.
How do you define science?
Rush Holt: It’s a way of ask-
ing questions so that they can be
answered empirically and verifi-
ably … You try things, you observe
things, you communicate your
conclusions, and you subject your
conclusions to other people who
will check your work. That’s sci-
ence. That’s the whole of science
right there. It’s empirically based
— evidence-based — it involves
open communication and an invi-
tation to others to check your
work. If you do all of those things
you’re thinking like a scientist.
And if you understand that, I think
you begin to understand and can
appreciate why it is important that
you have good science involved in
legislation and regulations, why
it is important that you have good
science involved in international
problems, why it is important that
you have good science involved
in social and economic decision-
making.
What is the role of science and
scientists in policymaking?
We have a problem in our soci-
ety understanding what science
is and why science is. For starters,
we should say that it is a liberal art.
You want to understand science
just as you would understand his-
tory or literature or other aspects
of human intellectual experience
… Science is not the exclusive path
to knowledge — there’s poetry and
story telling and religion — but it
is the most reliable and it happens
that it is also the most applicable.
It is a way of thinking that leads
to progress — in what most people
would say is progress. We need a
broader appreciation of that in soci-
ety; and the appreciation of science
in society at large is only so-so.
There are a lot of people that
appreciate the fruits of science —
the ultimate applications: your
iPhone here or something. But
they don’t understand the scientific
enterprise, how it works, what is
needed to sustain it. We really need
to develop that understanding in
society at large; and, surprisingly,
we need to develop that among
scientists as well. Most scientists
don’t think about science beyond
the methodologies and the termi-
nologies. They’re working on their
techniques, whether they’re on
paper or on the computer or in the
lab, and would be hard pressed to
give an understandable definition
of science — would be hard pressed
to talk about where science fits in
with the overall human endeavor.
How is science perceived by
Congress and the public?
I served in the House of Repre-
sentatives. Members of Congress
are representative of the popu-
lation at large. So when you see
members of Congress denying evi-
dence about vaccinations, deny-
ing climate change, avoiding any
thought about evolution, cutting
basic research funding, they’re
reflecting what is widespread in
our society and in our body politic.
It’s not as if they’re particularly ill-
informed or mendacious. They’re
representing what people are say-
ing and thinking, and people are
saying and thinking that the fruits
of science are really pretty good.
Most people would say that sci-
ence is beneficial and society is
making progress because of sci-
ence — but that number is eroding,
so that’s a troubling sign. And fur-
thermore, they don’t quite know
what that means, because they
don’t have that basic appreciate of
what and why science. They value
the fruits of science but really
don’t have a clue what it takes to
sustain science and how scientists
work … We need to communicate
not what science says is true
and false, but rather we need
to communicate how science
works and where science leads.
And you have to do that with good
stories. That’s how people com-
municate. All humans in modern
history communicate with stories
and anecdotes. That’s the way you
learn. That’s the way you make
decisions
How has the President played a
role in science policy?
This president is intellectu-
ally very curious, and that says a
lot — to me anyway. I was at the
White House last week for the
science fair, where he invited in a
lot of high school and elementary
school kids who had science proj-
ects and they all had their posters
up. He just loved it. He said it’s his
favorite day of the year — to inter-
act with kids who are discovering
things. It’s fun to watch their sense
of discovery, and he interacts with
them a lot.
T H E T H O U G H T B U B B L E
“Last week, these three girls were walking into
Skeeps, and one of them was eating a hot dog; her
friends walked in and she took one bite of her hot
dog, set it down on the top of the trashcan and went
in ... And then this guy with his shirt ripped open
all the way picks up the hot dog and eats the whole
thing.”
–Kinesiology sophomore TOBI HELLER on the funniest thing to
ever happen at the Maynard St. bar Scorekeeper’s
B Y I A N D I L L I N G H A M
PHOTO BY LUNA ANNA ARCHEY
MODERN ACTIVISM
ON THE
RECORD
“The past five years, there has been a real explosion of
collective action amongst students. I think the students
today are more knowledgeable, strategic and more
disciplined than we ever were.”
–Jewish Civil Rights activist LARRY RUBIN in a talk Monday
evening, in regards to the current landscape of student activism.
LUNA ARCHEY/DAILY
RITA MORRIS/DAILY
Read the rest of the interview at
MichiganDaily.com