www.psychspace.com心理学空间网Special New Year's Conversation between Professor Ryoji Noyori, President of RIKEN, and Professor Hayao Kawai, Commissioner of the Agency for Cultural Affairs
Aiming to make RIKEN a greater contributor to culture Noyori:As Japan's sole core institute for comprehensive research in science and technology, RIKEN carries out excellent world-class research. To make sure that RIKEN continues to excel, we asked for the advice of Professor Hayao Kawai, a highly distinguished man for whom I have the greatest respect. After becoming President, I announced five guidelines (the Noyori Initiative*) that would serve as a management policy. The fifth guideline is to make a "RIKEN that contributes to culture". Improving the level of culture at RIKEN will lead to even more first-rate science, and as I consider science to be an important element of culture I want RIKEN's activities to contribute to the culture of Japan.
Kawai:Science does fall under culture in the broad sense of the word, but in fact science has become far too strong. This definitely has to change. Another problem is that people with an arts background know absolutely nothing about science. Because they know nothing they have prejudices. Many people seem to think that scientists spend all their time talking in jargon about obscure ideas, and that science is completely divorced from any sense of the aesthetic. When Japan was pursuing science in order to catch up with and surpass the West, it might not have been necessary to think too much about cultural matters, but as we move past this, the level will completely change.
Noyori:As a natural scientist, I believe there are four main elements within culture. There is science, then logic, the third is sensibility (joucho), and lastly language. When these four come together they give birth to a variety of different cultures. All four are closely connected, and to produce good science, logic, or should I say intellect, must be given its proper place. Sensibility and language are also extraordinarily important.
Kawai:The most clear-cut language of all is the language of numerical formulas. Our everyday language is sometimes vague, and science does its best to eliminate that. Science is good at explaining things that have happened, and formulas are useful for describing things, but in order to discover new things we have to enter the realm of ambiguity.
Noyori:Scientific thinking involves various elements of culture. Intellect and logic are especially emphasized, but I think sensibility also has a large role.
Kawai:In a broad sense, scientific thinking is like aesthetic sense, and even the definition of beauty has changed dramatically. Look at music. There are certain chords that were never used in the past but are now common. Nowadays these chords are thought to be harmonious, but in the old days people rejected them. Science is also a kind of harmonic system in which the level and the quality of the harmony changes over time. In this regard, I think science and music are very similar.
Noyori:Of course intellect and sensitivity, and also technique, must be cultivated from childhood. In the Japanese education system science students and arts students are separated at a relatively young age, and I believe that this is the road to ruin for our country.
Kawai:I too am strongly opposed to that. It is ridiculous to divide students into sciences and arts at high school age.
Encouragement, respect, morale Noyori:I've never been one for fun and games, so, since work is my only talent, I've spent my life teaching and doing research at universities.
Kawai:Well, the work of a teacher, in the old-fashioned sense, is very close to amusement. You don't make any money out of it but you get to do what you enjoy.(Laughs)
Noyori:That's right.(Laughs.)At both research institutes and universities, it is essential to train people through research activities and avoid wearing them down. But at institutes these days staff have to spend their time on tiring things like evaluations and applications for funding. It is the same for the administrative staff. I think we need to raise the overall level of culture at research institutes to boost the morale of the staff. Otherwise we will all go downhill.
Kawai:I agree. I thought I'd try something interesting, seeing as I was at the Agency of Cultural Affairs, so I invited Mrs. Akiko Baba to our offices, and we got everyone to join in a linked verse (renga) session. Someone would say a poem with three lines of five, seven and five syllables, and you had to respond with two lines of seven syllables. We got Mrs. Baba to coach us, and it turned out to be quite fun. Making linked verse is not a matter of logic. But you can't go in a completely different direction. You can't stick too closely to the previous verse, either. You have to make new lines with an appropriate distance from the previous ones. Another time we held a drama workshop. Maybe you ought to give these kinds of things a try.
Noyori:That's very good advice. If we include lots of cultural elements in our everyday lives then it will help personal relations with other people and generate mutual respect. I think this would raise the morale of everyone at RIKEN.
First-rate science is easy to understand Noyori:RIKEN's third president, Masatoshi Okochi, was quite a man of culture. He gave RIKEN its current spirit, and promoted basic science. He set up the Y. Nishina Laboratory, which later produced two Nobel laureates, Hideki Yukawa and Shin-ichiro Tomonaga. He also tried to share the knowledge achieved through basic science with the general public, by setting up about 60 companies as part of the "RIKEN Konzern". Okochi was like Rosanjin [one of Japan's most important 20th-century ceramicists, talented in pottery, calligraphy and painting, and well known as a gourmet]. He was good at cooking, pottery, painting and hunting. I believe we need to use the lessons Okochi taught us to equip RIKEN for the new century. Scientists used to pursue a wide range of interests. Yukawa and Tomonaga were also very cultured men, and Torahiko Terada [a physicist well known for his literary essays] was associated with RIKEN. We need people like this.
I think we have to verify the justifications for science and technology once again. To do this, science has to be assessed in a way that includes not only scientists but people from the humanities as well. I think culture covers both of these groups.
Kawai:But finding a way to make non-specialists, especially people from the humanities, understand cutting-edge science is an extremely difficult challenge.
Noyori:Technology is relatively easy to understand, because people can examine its social utility. Educating the general public about basic science is perhaps our most important task. The universe was created in the Big Bang 13.7 billion years ago, the Earth was formed 4.6 billion years ago, life started 3.6 billion years ago, and since then various life forms have evolved. In other words we study where man came from, where he is now, and where he will go in the future. This is the most important thing.
Kawai:Maybe it is strange to do cultural activities without knowing those kinds of things. There is a Zen koan that goes "Two hands make a sound when they clap. What is the sound of one hand clapping?" That is all well and good, but as a religious person in the modern age I once asked for example, "What is the 'sound' of Chernobyl?"
Noyori:We must not hide away in our ivory towers. It is essential that we explain the significance of what we are doing to the public in ways that they can understand.
Kawai:But scientists are engrossed in their experiments and theories, and don't seem to be able to do other things.
Noyori:What the scientific community needs is something like a "spokes-team" of senior scientists. One person cannot do everything on their own, so the scientific community as a whole has to take on the responsibility.
Kawai:That is probably the best way. Otherwise individuals will have to do everything, and that will definitely not work.
Noyori:Knowing the facts, the truth, about the universe and nature is crucially important, and if we convey them skillfully then people are sure to find it interesting. I think this would have a huge impact on society. After all, first-rate science is easy to understand.
The scientific mind-set of the future: East and West Noyori:Looking ahead to the science of the future, another significant point is the difference between Western science and Japanese or Eastern science. I would say that the two differ in their logic and their ethics.
Kawai:That's right. But the Western way of thinking connects more easily with science, which was born in the West. Doing science with the Eastern way of thinking is twice as hard.
Noyori:Western thought has always been reductionist, but in the East we think more about the whole. Twenty-first century science is moving away from an analytical approach and towards synthesis or generalization. In areas which require flexibility, scientists from the East and Japan will probably play a major role.
Kawai:If we are not careful in Japan we label people as outstanding simply because they reflexively follow the West. Some people have quickly reached the rank of professor mainly by abandoning Eastern thinking. When this happens, junior people get in trouble if they come up with interesting ideas. Leaders have to be aware of this hazard. You have to acknowledge and encourage people who do or say things that are very different from your own ideas. Ideas that have only just been suggested have many drawbacks, and so if you try to criticize them it is easy to do so.
Noyori:Yes, that's right. People who come up with original ideas are always the minority at that time.
Kawai:You need to have the generosity to hold off and allow more time for assessing these ideas.
Noyori:Another problem is that assessments are made in such a uniform way.
Kawai:Yes, it's frightening. Some people say that it is easier to assess matters in the sciences than in the arts or humanities, but it's not that simple. Ideas need to be examined from different perspectives and over a long period of time. The tendency in the West is to trust the person making a claim, and wait and see what happens. Japanese people immediately regard claims as subjective, but that is a subjectivity that has been refined by experience.
Naturally the larger a task, the lower the success rate of individuals. Hiring ten people and them all doing good work only happens with small projects. Hiring ten people and only one of them doing good work leads to greater achievements. Japan must keep this in mind, and not focus exclusively on so-called objective assessments. Japan's tradition of science is short, so Japanese tend not to rely on particular individuals but instead to hire people who on average do not fail. But even if the average mark is low, all it takes is one person with a score of 120 to achieve a success. A lot more thought needs to be given to this.
Noyori:Yes, relying on individuals. What would you say are the characteristics and the weak points of people in the East?
Kawai:I've often said that in my experience people in the East look more at the whole. A cognitive psychologist in the US once did some experiments and concluded that the West and the East have fundamentally different ways of cognition. For example, he showed test subjects an animated scene of a fish swimming around in a fishbowl for a few minutes. When they were asked what they had seen, the subjects from Japan, South Korea and China all started by describing the overall scene. But the American subjects began their descriptions by saying that there was a large fish moving from the center to the right. This is a clear difference that was shown by the data. Another example was an economic development curve. The subjects were asked to predict the fourth year results after three consecutive years of an upward trend. The ones of Anglo-Saxon descent predicted a continuing climb, but everyone from the East predicted a decline.
Noyori:Do you think this has anything to do with cyclicity or the Buddhist cycle of reincarnation?
Kawai:Yes, I do. Eastern thought is fundamentally cyclical, while Western thought is linear.
Noyori:Ah, the linear model. The West uses a linear model, while the East uses a cyclic model.
Kawai:Science traces its beginnings to the linear model. Is science based on a cyclic model possible? That is a very important question.
Noyori:In the future science and technology must move from a linear model to a cyclic model. As this happens I hope that Japanese and Eastern people will be able to put their distinctive characteristics to use.
Kawai:When that time comes, the Japanese will not be very sophisticated in their use of the cyclic approach, and they might simply resort to being vague. They might even become illogical. Naturally we have to use words that make sense to non-Japanese. How is the cyclic approach different from the linear model that Westerners talk about, and why is it different? We will have to explain these things clearly. However, Japanese scientists have dedicated themselves to catching up with and surpassing the West, and they have done their best to cast aside the cyclic model. It could turn out that Japanese academics are more set in their ways, more Western than the West. So if Japan is to play a larger role globally, it must not throw away its traditional legacy but instead make use of it in pursuit of science. I feel this will become a major issue from here on.
Noyori:I am sure that young researchers in Japan will be encouraged to hear that from you. On another topic, people say that the Japanese are given to being technically proficient but not conceptual. What do you think about this?
Kawai:The idea of a firm conceptual foundation is probably a Western one to begin with. Japanese are very bad at creating abstract concepts, but very capable when it comes to practical matters. Sensitivity to nature (mono-no-aware) is typically Japanese, but that is not really a concept. Things that cannot be conceptualized are understood by everyone through physical experience. This isn't a bad thing. It means living in reality.
Kawai:Science does fall under culture in the broad sense of the word, but in fact science has become far too strong. This definitely has to change. Another problem is that people with an arts background know absolutely nothing about science. Because they know nothing they have prejudices. Many people seem to think that scientists spend all their time talking in jargon about obscure ideas, and that science is completely divorced from any sense of the aesthetic. When Japan was pursuing science in order to catch up with and surpass the West, it might not have been necessary to think too much about cultural matters, but as we move past this, the level will completely change.
Noyori:As a natural scientist, I believe there are four main elements within culture. There is science, then logic, the third is sensibility (joucho), and lastly language. When these four come together they give birth to a variety of different cultures. All four are closely connected, and to produce good science, logic, or should I say intellect, must be given its proper place. Sensibility and language are also extraordinarily important.
Kawai:The most clear-cut language of all is the language of numerical formulas. Our everyday language is sometimes vague, and science does its best to eliminate that. Science is good at explaining things that have happened, and formulas are useful for describing things, but in order to discover new things we have to enter the realm of ambiguity.
Noyori:Scientific thinking involves various elements of culture. Intellect and logic are especially emphasized, but I think sensibility also has a large role.
Kawai:In a broad sense, scientific thinking is like aesthetic sense, and even the definition of beauty has changed dramatically. Look at music. There are certain chords that were never used in the past but are now common. Nowadays these chords are thought to be harmonious, but in the old days people rejected them. Science is also a kind of harmonic system in which the level and the quality of the harmony changes over time. In this regard, I think science and music are very similar.
Noyori:Of course intellect and sensitivity, and also technique, must be cultivated from childhood. In the Japanese education system science students and arts students are separated at a relatively young age, and I believe that this is the road to ruin for our country.
Kawai:I too am strongly opposed to that. It is ridiculous to divide students into sciences and arts at high school age.
Kawai:Well, the work of a teacher, in the old-fashioned sense, is very close to amusement. You don't make any money out of it but you get to do what you enjoy.(Laughs)
Noyori:That's right.(Laughs.)At both research institutes and universities, it is essential to train people through research activities and avoid wearing them down. But at institutes these days staff have to spend their time on tiring things like evaluations and applications for funding. It is the same for the administrative staff. I think we need to raise the overall level of culture at research institutes to boost the morale of the staff. Otherwise we will all go downhill.
Kawai:I agree. I thought I'd try something interesting, seeing as I was at the Agency of Cultural Affairs, so I invited Mrs. Akiko Baba to our offices, and we got everyone to join in a linked verse (renga) session. Someone would say a poem with three lines of five, seven and five syllables, and you had to respond with two lines of seven syllables. We got Mrs. Baba to coach us, and it turned out to be quite fun. Making linked verse is not a matter of logic. But you can't go in a completely different direction. You can't stick too closely to the previous verse, either. You have to make new lines with an appropriate distance from the previous ones. Another time we held a drama workshop. Maybe you ought to give these kinds of things a try.
Noyori:That's very good advice. If we include lots of cultural elements in our everyday lives then it will help personal relations with other people and generate mutual respect. I think this would raise the morale of everyone at RIKEN.
I think we have to verify the justifications for science and technology once again. To do this, science has to be assessed in a way that includes not only scientists but people from the humanities as well. I think culture covers both of these groups.
Kawai:But finding a way to make non-specialists, especially people from the humanities, understand cutting-edge science is an extremely difficult challenge.
Noyori:Technology is relatively easy to understand, because people can examine its social utility. Educating the general public about basic science is perhaps our most important task. The universe was created in the Big Bang 13.7 billion years ago, the Earth was formed 4.6 billion years ago, life started 3.6 billion years ago, and since then various life forms have evolved. In other words we study where man came from, where he is now, and where he will go in the future. This is the most important thing.
Kawai:Maybe it is strange to do cultural activities without knowing those kinds of things. There is a Zen koan that goes "Two hands make a sound when they clap. What is the sound of one hand clapping?" That is all well and good, but as a religious person in the modern age I once asked for example, "What is the 'sound' of Chernobyl?"
Noyori:We must not hide away in our ivory towers. It is essential that we explain the significance of what we are doing to the public in ways that they can understand.
Kawai:But scientists are engrossed in their experiments and theories, and don't seem to be able to do other things.
Noyori:What the scientific community needs is something like a "spokes-team" of senior scientists. One person cannot do everything on their own, so the scientific community as a whole has to take on the responsibility.
Kawai:That is probably the best way. Otherwise individuals will have to do everything, and that will definitely not work.
Noyori:Knowing the facts, the truth, about the universe and nature is crucially important, and if we convey them skillfully then people are sure to find it interesting. I think this would have a huge impact on society. After all, first-rate science is easy to understand.
Kawai:That's right. But the Western way of thinking connects more easily with science, which was born in the West. Doing science with the Eastern way of thinking is twice as hard.
Noyori:Western thought has always been reductionist, but in the East we think more about the whole. Twenty-first century science is moving away from an analytical approach and towards synthesis or generalization. In areas which require flexibility, scientists from the East and Japan will probably play a major role.
Kawai:If we are not careful in Japan we label people as outstanding simply because they reflexively follow the West. Some people have quickly reached the rank of professor mainly by abandoning Eastern thinking. When this happens, junior people get in trouble if they come up with interesting ideas. Leaders have to be aware of this hazard. You have to acknowledge and encourage people who do or say things that are very different from your own ideas. Ideas that have only just been suggested have many drawbacks, and so if you try to criticize them it is easy to do so.
Noyori:Yes, that's right. People who come up with original ideas are always the minority at that time.
Kawai:You need to have the generosity to hold off and allow more time for assessing these ideas.
Noyori:Another problem is that assessments are made in such a uniform way.
Kawai:Yes, it's frightening. Some people say that it is easier to assess matters in the sciences than in the arts or humanities, but it's not that simple. Ideas need to be examined from different perspectives and over a long period of time. The tendency in the West is to trust the person making a claim, and wait and see what happens. Japanese people immediately regard claims as subjective, but that is a subjectivity that has been refined by experience.
Naturally the larger a task, the lower the success rate of individuals. Hiring ten people and them all doing good work only happens with small projects. Hiring ten people and only one of them doing good work leads to greater achievements. Japan must keep this in mind, and not focus exclusively on so-called objective assessments. Japan's tradition of science is short, so Japanese tend not to rely on particular individuals but instead to hire people who on average do not fail. But even if the average mark is low, all it takes is one person with a score of 120 to achieve a success. A lot more thought needs to be given to this.
Noyori:Yes, relying on individuals. What would you say are the characteristics and the weak points of people in the East?
Kawai:I've often said that in my experience people in the East look more at the whole. A cognitive psychologist in the US once did some experiments and concluded that the West and the East have fundamentally different ways of cognition. For example, he showed test subjects an animated scene of a fish swimming around in a fishbowl for a few minutes. When they were asked what they had seen, the subjects from Japan, South Korea and China all started by describing the overall scene. But the American subjects began their descriptions by saying that there was a large fish moving from the center to the right. This is a clear difference that was shown by the data. Another example was an economic development curve. The subjects were asked to predict the fourth year results after three consecutive years of an upward trend. The ones of Anglo-Saxon descent predicted a continuing climb, but everyone from the East predicted a decline.
Noyori:Do you think this has anything to do with cyclicity or the Buddhist cycle of reincarnation?
Kawai:Yes, I do. Eastern thought is fundamentally cyclical, while Western thought is linear.
Noyori:Ah, the linear model. The West uses a linear model, while the East uses a cyclic model.
Kawai:Science traces its beginnings to the linear model. Is science based on a cyclic model possible? That is a very important question.
Noyori:In the future science and technology must move from a linear model to a cyclic model. As this happens I hope that Japanese and Eastern people will be able to put their distinctive characteristics to use.
Kawai:When that time comes, the Japanese will not be very sophisticated in their use of the cyclic approach, and they might simply resort to being vague. They might even become illogical. Naturally we have to use words that make sense to non-Japanese. How is the cyclic approach different from the linear model that Westerners talk about, and why is it different? We will have to explain these things clearly. However, Japanese scientists have dedicated themselves to catching up with and surpassing the West, and they have done their best to cast aside the cyclic model. It could turn out that Japanese academics are more set in their ways, more Western than the West. So if Japan is to play a larger role globally, it must not throw away its traditional legacy but instead make use of it in pursuit of science. I feel this will become a major issue from here on.
Noyori:I am sure that young researchers in Japan will be encouraged to hear that from you. On another topic, people say that the Japanese are given to being technically proficient but not conceptual. What do you think about this?
Kawai:The idea of a firm conceptual foundation is probably a Western one to begin with. Japanese are very bad at creating abstract concepts, but very capable when it comes to practical matters. Sensitivity to nature (mono-no-aware) is typically Japanese, but that is not really a concept. Things that cannot be conceptualized are understood by everyone through physical experience. This isn't a bad thing. It means living in reality.