ERNST PÖPPEL is a neuroscientist, chairman of the board of directors of the Human Science Center, and chair of the Institute of Medical Psychology, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Munich. He is the author of Mindworks: Time and Conscious Experience.
The average life expectancy of a species on this globe is just a few million years. From an external point of view, it would be nothing special if humankind were to suddenly disappear. We have been here for some time. With humans no longer around, evolutionary processes would have an even better chance to fill in all those ecological niches that have been created by human activities. As we change the world, and as thousands of species are lost every year because of human activities, we provide a new and productive environment for the creation of new species. Thus, humankind is creative with respect to providing a frame for new evolutionary trajectories—and would be even more creative if it disappeared altogether. If somebody (unfortunately not our descendant) were to visit this globe sometime later, he would meet many new species that owe their existence to the presence and disappearance of humankind.
But this is not going to happen, because we are doing science. With science we apparently get a better understanding of basic principles in nature, we have a chance to improve quality of life, and we can develop means to extend the life expectancy of our species. However, some of these scientific activities have a paradoxical effect, in that they may result in a higher risk of our disappearance. Maybe science will not be so effective after all in preventing it.
Now comes my dangerous idea. My own personal dangerous idea is my belief in science.
In all my research in the field of temporal perception and visual processes, I have had a basic trust in the science and I believe the results I have obtained. And I believe the results of others. But why? I know that there are many unknown and unknowable variables that are part of the experimental setup and cannot be controlled. How can I trust, in the face of so many unknowables? Furthermore, can I really rely on my thinking? Can I trust my own eyes and ears? Can I be so sure about my scientific work that I communicate the results with pride to others?
If I look at the complexity of the brain, how is it possible that something reasonable comes out of this network? How is it possible that a face I see or a thought of mine can maintain their identity over time? If I have no access to what goes on in my brain, how can I be proud (how can anybody be proud) of scientific achievements?