Ramón Núñez (A Coruña, 78 years old) is one of the great disseminators of science in Spain, especially as a designer of scientific museums. He created the three of his hometown: the House of Sciences, the Domus and the Aquarium Finisterrae. He was also promoter and director of the National Museum of Science and Technology, and has advised in other spaces dedicated to making the scientific company attractive and understandable, such as the Pamplona planetarium or the Prince Felipe Sciences Museum in Valencia. In Madrid and another scientific center, the National Museum of Natural Sciences, recently presented its latest book. It’s about The calendar of the history of sciencea kind of almanac that every day of the year offers the history of a finding or event related to science or technology that occurred on that date.
Núñez considers that this book – a good tool to become familiar day by day with much of the scientific discoveries of history and with its protagonists – is their best work. In a conversation with the country prior to the presentation of its scientific calendar, this museologist and disseminator reflects on the power of science to change the world and how necessary it is on a day -to -day basis; But never alone, but accompanied by ethics and going out to meet poetry, art and philosophy. Since his first stage as a school teacher, Núñez has always refused to replace faith in God by faith in science; Today he adds: “He who lives a life based absolutely on rationality will have a very bad time.”
Ask. Science is sometimes treated as a source of curious stories, and in newspapers it was included in the so -called soft sections, but there is nothing more transformative.
Answer. Science is not only polymorphic, but it is versatile. Science is a reason for fun, of illustration, as long as it allows us to reach the knowledge of the environment and when we get the knowledge of something, we can already play with that something. In that sense, science with culture can allow us that game, but it is also the engine of progress. The most powerful, according to (Francis) Bacon. Science is what makes our quality of life change, it is what improves our health, improves our communications, improves our possibilities of socialization, everything.
It is a stereotype to say that people when we get older are skeptical and that we do not believe in anything. Well, at the end of life, I believe in something and I believe in science. I believe that science is very useful and necessary to the individual and society. It is useful to understand the world, to live in balance with the environment and is useful to change the world. Now, if they tell me: “science is enough,” no. It is necessary, but it is not enough. In addition to science, we need love. Love to our fellow men, love of humanity, love of the planet. Science alone without values is not worth.
P. But science and technology also cause serious problems for people, as seen in the industrial revolution.
R. The ethical-moral decisions are posteriori. We discover the knife and we see that it is useful for eating and then we discover that it is useful to kill a fellow man. And then we introduce the ethical code. Ethics or legislation go after achievement, because it is a condition of the future to be unpredictable.
P. Does artificial intelligence give vertigo?
R. It gives me authentic vertigo. When I think about this, I am very happy to have lived the years I lived because I had the feeling that I could mentally control my world. My only hope is that young people, who have been educated in another rhythm of progress and knowledge, also have the skills to control these weapons that are so powerful. But they give me vertigo. I don’t say fear, but vertigo.
P. IA is supposed to allow developing new materials more quickly, creating new drugs to treat diseases and facilitate life in every way. And yet, we are very afraid.
R. Because being too powerful, a sensible person has to be afraid.
P. In his last book he says that, before Foucault’s pendulum demonstrated the rotation of the earth, it was already mostly accepted that revolved on herself instead of thinking that it was the sun that revolved around the earth by intuition, although it had not been proven. Do we believe a lot in science without knowing why?
R. When I gave courses in science to teachers, I raised a game in which I was a shepherd and they had to convince me that it is the earth that revolves around the sun, and not vice versa. No one ever managed to convince me. So if a kid raises you in class that you do not believe that roll that you are telling it that it is the earth that revolves around the sun, what do you do? Do you punish him because you can’t put your faith? No, you have to respect and value his critical spirit and think about the arguments that you can convince him.
P. Did harm to science the use that was made during pandemia, when used to justify political decisions?
R. He hurt science because it was used as an argument of authority. That is why it seems to me that it is important to demystify. There is a phrase by Richard Feynman that says that “science is to believe in the ignorance of scientists.” In the book many times I try to take things as a joke, demystify science and humanize it. Science is made by human beings, who have their vices and their virtues and their whims. You cannot use science as an infallible argument to justify policies, to say: “We are going to do this because science sends it.”
P. How do you see the situation of science in Spain?
R. We have complex that we are not capable and that is false. That is, we are as capable as any other people. We had to spend more, but that’s obvious, I don’t need to say it.
P. There is another event of the book in which he speaks of the encounter between Einstein and the philosopher Bergson, who defended that there was a subjective time beyond that measured by physicists. It is a very interesting story about the power and limits of science.
R. There is a confucio phrase that says nothing happens faster than the years. And it is true, because there are minutes that seem eternal and years that fly you. There is a perception of time that is intimate, which is personal. Waiting times are slow and there are other times that spend very fast. But of course, Einstein has to tell you that all these are stories. Because at the moment of truth, the only real time is what can be measured. But science cannot deny poetry. It would be stupid to live without poetry, without beauty. Art is necessary, just like science.
P. What do you think of the skeptical movement, which seeks a confrontation between materialism and people who thought that metaphysics can be useful?
R. Pure materialism is very useful to solve a lot of problems, but we nuance. I have a very rational person, but in my life, the decisions that have provided me with more pleasure were very irrational. Today I ate, wonderfully, but in a very little rational way, because I had an excessive deed of triglycerides, cholesterol, alcohol … an important decision in my life, such as getting married, was based on falling in love, and falling in love is of everything but rational. The decision to study some subjects has had to do with my best friend. He who lives a life based absolutely on rationality will have a very bad time.
P. How can science be explained to children and young people without giving it as a catechism?
R. For me, the key is to take the child from the hand and look in the same direction. If you ask a question, you don’t have to answer. The child cannot have the idea that the adult is an answer factory. You have to help you look to find the answer. It is, instead of facing each other, to answer, put on his side to ask him with him and be channeling. And not worry because a question generates more questions.
For more updates, visit our homepage: NewsTimesWire
