Peter Watson argues that science, unlike art, philosophy, politics, culture or other forms of human endeavor was never reflective; it never looked backed on its past and wondered why, or whether it was a good idea. Science moves irrevocably forward, constantly refining and leaving in its trail technological gadgets that make life easier and easier.
Whereas a politician might wonder if Marxism wasn't an expressly bad idea, or an artist might not wonder if 'ready-made' is pushing art too far, science does not wonder much. A few might, such as with something like the nuclear bomb, but for the most part the follow on of those discoveries and theories in technology - in health for instance - make the point moot for the general population.
This does mean that art, philosophy, politics and culture are constantly playing catch up to science. Their response is reactive simply because the scientific method and technology dumps it on society to be consumed in a meaningful manner. Stem cells are a recent example of politics and culture being left to navigate the wake of science.
The other aspect of science is its 'self-sufficiency'. The large discoveries of the twentieth century we made in isolation and then presented to peers. Quite unusual when compared to art, philosophy or politics. Science also became specialised beyond the realm of the educated class. The average person does not know how a cell phone works despite paying $80 every month to speak, text and browse with it. Watson writes:
For non-specialists, the inaccessibility of science didn't matter, or it didn't matter very much, for the technology that was the product of difficult science worked, conferring authority on physics, medicine, and even mathematics.The flip-side of that coin is that science has fashion too and prior controversies are taught as truth - for instance the duality of light is common to all Year 10 students in Australia, but in the 19thC the though that light might be photons as well as a wave was unfathomable. Science's dominance and authority leaves the question to be answered that does the knowledge of science constitute a special kind of knowledge, higher than all others.
