LITERATURE AND SCIENCE

For the text EVOLUTION OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE: LITERARY PERSPECTIVES meant for Undergraduates in M.G. University as part of the syllabus since 2009.

Summary of the essay "Literature and Science"
With due credits to the editors and essayist
For Academic use only

LITERATURE AND SCIENCE

This essay written by Aldous Huxley opens up possible divergences between the attitudes and approaches taken up by the man of science and the man of letters. Huxley tries his best to elucidate a very complicated topic, though for a layman the essay seems insurmountable. The topic of science as well as of literature could remain centered on human affairs but they are always mutually exclusive.

Huxley begins his essay by stating the fact that experiences of life are vital in interpreting human condition. Most of our experiences are private but some experiences can occur to so many people in similar fashion, hence there are possible similarities in experiences. The outer reality of an experience may be different from the inner reality. This inner emotional experience cannot be shared among people faithfully. The sense experiences can be shareable and they are less private just as the intellectual experiences.

Huxley provides a very short definition of science. It may be defined as “a device for investigating, ordering, and communicating the more public of human experience”.  In contrast to this, literature deals with man’s private experiences and their frequent interaction with the public sphere.

From this point Huxley undertakes the comparison between the man of science and the man of letters. The man of science observes his own and the reports of other people’s more public experiences, conceptualizes them in terms of some language, which are followed by his cultural group. By using these concepts, he attempts to provide straightforward definitions. He further tries to prove them by observation and experiment so as to attain logical conclusions.

In contrast the man of letters is not satisfied with what is reflected as outside reality. He goes more into the private experiences where in which there is little use of logic. He rejects the scientific method of abstracted generalization. His method is to concentrate upon some individual case and to universalize the private.

The world of literature does not confine to one unique space. The multifarious world encompasses a wide range of human feeling and emotion. But these are not vital for a man of science. He occupies a totally world. He finds a place in the world of quantified regularities. Though seemingly abstract, scientists and technologists are able to control the world with this sense of knowledge. In contrast, the man of letters accepts the diversity and incomprehensibility of human existence and attempts to give shape to shapeless individual existence. Thus the man of letters moves from concrete to abstract whereas a man of science moves from abstract to concrete.

Huxley, as part of conclusion, tries to distinguish between bad literature and good literature. Bad literature does not go beyond the ordinary experience whereas in good literature, the effort of the writer is to communicate in words that have real abstract quality. Common, down to earth language may not be sufficient to express the rich private experience. Hence Huxley says that every literary artist must find some uncommon language capable of expressing those emotions. The symbolic quality of language should be sufficiently explored. The genius of a writer rests on his capability to communicate the subtle levels of human thought. It is often the predicament of science and literature to find themselves in a position where certain things are left unspoken and left unexplained.  A complete realization of truth is often impossible.  So, no wonder, Huxley states that the rest is silence.