No.19
March,1999
Dr. Hiroshi Inose (Director of NACSIS)
Robert Hutchins (1) declared that“the greatest menace to our civilization is the menace of the uneducated expert” and went on to make the criticism that the only common topic of conversation among university professors at their faculty clubs is the weather. It is common knowledge that in the last 200 years of intellectual activity fragmentation has continued in the name of specialization. Friedrich Nietzsche (2) wrote about a researcher by a pond who responded as follows when questioned by Zarathustra as to whether he was studying leeches:
“This is the greatest challenge. How could I dare to do such things. The subject of study, of which I am a master and knower, is the brain of the leech... It is for this that I have cast aside everything else. It is because of this that I have become disinterested in all other things. Thus a dark unconsciousness lies next to my knowledge.”
With the deepening range of intellectual activity fragmentation is unavoidable, but the unlimited proliferation of its concomitant, stark ignorance, poses a severe threat to civilization. It is to be feared that the decline of the liberal arts is the main culprit in the spawning of hordes of uneducated experts.
Fragmentation is proceeding apace in the formal community once known as the family of nations. In the fifty years following the Second World War the number of independent states has risen rapidly from about fifty to over one hundred and sixty. It is expected that the disintegration of states will evolve further as their subgroups lay claim to exclusive ethnic, cultural, religious and geographic identities, to the point where we may see the resurgence of ancient tribal societies, albeit in new garbs. If these countries continue to pursue political, economic and ideological independence with the rights inherent in national identities, the so-called family of nations will be reduced to a mere arena for political deals in which they will quickly lose their ability to resolve their problems. Already the resolution of the pressing issues of nuclear proliferation and environmental pollution that threaten us on a global scale is proving extremely difficult. On the other hand, if a national identity can strengthen unity among people who share common values and customs it can contribute to the maturing of indigenous cultures through selective acceptance of foreign cultural options while avoiding domination as a result of weakness. It can contribute to the promotion of understanding among the different cultures and usher in a bright future for humankind.
Fragmentation is also in progress in the area of information and communication that are considered to be powerful tools promoting mutual understanding on a global scale. At the time UNESCOÕs MacBride Report (3) was published the danger of powerful radio and television monopolies covering the world and of a dominant modern civilization communicated through them overwhelming regional and indigenous cultures was expressed. As suggested in the report, the replacement of local languages by an international language continues on a global scale, and that of local dialects by standard language at the national level. However, the rapid development of digital technology provides an opportunity for a vast number of channels in the electronic media, ushering in new possibilities. Indeed, the fact that one broadcasting satellite covers one third of the globe and provides information through hundreds of television channels indicates the possibility of addressing diverse interests and concerns in addition to serving as a medium for individual languages. Actually, fragmentation or so-called narrow channeling is already in evidence. One can say that the rapid expansion of the Internet is promoting fragmentation in the same way. At the same time there is a move to collaborate in problem-solving by exchanging opinions on matters of shared interest based on mutual understanding. It is unfortunate, however, that the potential of these communities of interest tends to be ignored.
At a time when globalization is touted as the key to the peace and prosperity of the world why do people persist in seeing themselves in the pigeonholes of their separate interests, totally disregarding any thought for human happiness? With the dramatic development of both communications and transportation, people of the world are today able to communicate freely transcending geographical distances. How is it that people are still so disinterested in the common problems of humankind? Why is it that we are so perplexed when faced with the task of resolving global issues? One reason is that at the expense of fads, little importance is placed on things of unchanging value in both our personal priorities places of learning. Basic education rooted in culture and tradition is slighted. If we are to overcome the present situation in which only the acquisition of transient specialized knowledge is considered important, reinstatement of liberal arts education is urgent. The second reason is the absence of or insufficient effort to reinforce the problem-solving capacity of the formal community of states. With the progression of fragmentation, we witness the emergence of diverse communities of interests among informal entities made up of groups of people sharing common interests. We must not only be aware of them but also utilize their problem-solving capacities.
As stated at the beginning of this column, beyond the diminishing worlds of the endlessly fragmenting fields of expertise lies a dark unconsciousness. This is particularly evident in the natural sciences, the increasing scope and complexity of which are bringing about serious and diverse impacts on society. Given that researchers in the natural sciences lack even a basic knowledge of humanities and social sciences, we are faced with a dire threat to civilization. On the other hand, for those who call themselves experts in the fields of humanities and social sciences, it is essential to understand the basic attributes of the natural sciences so that they may be put to appropriate use as tools for serving individuals and society.
In other words, be it in humanities, social sciences or natural sciences, we live in an age in which there is a need for a broad cross-fertilization of knowledge in addition to pursuing fragmented specialization. It is clearly impossible in such an age of extreme fragmentation and specialization to be well versed in oneÕs own field of specialization, and at the same time, have even a basic knowledge of all others. However, although it is difficult, it is not altogether impossible to be versed in oneÕs field of expertise and to have the capacity to understand basic features of all others in a broad sence. To support this, it is essential to provide well-organized basic knowledge that encompasses the humanities, social sciences and natural sciences, in addition to even greater accumulation of the scattered pieces of knowledge being generated from a great many fragmented areas. An information infrastructure should be built to make this possible. To this end, NACSIS will intensify its effort to provide network and database services that comprehensively cover diverse areas of the humanities, social sciences and natural sciences, while strengthening its research and development activities to further enhance its services.