The history and progress of science have demonstrated, among other things, that ‘there is no useless knowledge’, ‘that more knowledge is better than less’, and ‘that a theory or model formulated using full information is better in explaining the real world and predicting future events in the relevant field, compared to a theory or model based on partial information’. 

Further, there is no credible evidence that some knowledge (for instance the physical or ‘natural’ sciences) is significantly better than or superior to other types of knowledge (for example the ‘non-sciences’, that is, the arts and social sciences). As the saying goes, “One man’s meat is another’s poison”.

The Uganda government has been putting undue emphasis on the sciences for quite some time now. Consequently, policy right now is skewed positively in favour of the sciences at the expense of the ‘non-sciences’. For example, at universities, government sponsorship is almost wholly devoted to students offering science-based courses at the expense of the arts and social sciences courses.

A cyclist carries two employees of a security company without observing anti-Covid-19 SOPs. PHOTO/FILE.

Even research on issues dealing with the sciences is often preferred to that in the arts and social sciences.

Current policy spells out that science teachers, instructors, and other scientists employed by government should be paid significantly higher salaries and other remunerations than those with similar academic and other qualifications in the ‘non-sciences’.

Recently, efforts to combat the Covid-19 pandemic included assembling a team of scientists to advise the President and the committee subsequently set up to look at the nitty-gritty of enforcing the standard operating procedures (SOPs) and related measures put in place to combat the pandemic and research on a Covid-19 cure or vaccine. 

No counterpart team of ‘non-scientists’ (economists, political scientists, sociologists, psychologists, lawyers, cultural experts, and so on) was simultaneously constituted to advise on how to sensitise and persuade communities to strictly observe the SOPs and related issues. Most likely, it was assumed (wrongly, in my opinion) that the scientists would do everything necessary, including working on sensitisation and society’s mindset change.

To reiterate, all knowledge is important—as succinctly illustrated in my recently published book (Research Methodology: Philosophy, Processes and Procedures, 2020). 

The sciences and the ‘non-sciences’ actually complement each other; they are not diametrically opposed, given the unity of science. 

In the 1950s and 1960s, the United States and Canada made the same mistake Uganda is making now; the countries overemphasised sciences at the expense of the ‘non-sciences’. 

By the end of the 1960s, the countries had overproduced scientists—such as mathematicians, mechanical and electrical engineers and other specialists in the sciences. As a result, many of the scientists could not find employment in their respective fields of specialisation. Most of these highly-qualified scientists had no alternative but to turn their attention to specialisations in the ‘non-sciences, such as economics and psychology—which offered better employment prospects. 

For instance, in my Master’s degree level econometrics class in Canada in 1975, out of the six students, three were holders of degrees in the sciences—two with Mathematics degrees (PhD and M.Sc., respectively) and the third with a Bachelor’s degree in Engineering. 

Further, my Microeconomics professor had a PhD degree in Engineering, while my econometrics professor possessed a Mathematics PhD degree (in addition to their PhD degrees in Economics); they had also switched from the sciences to the ‘non-sciences’ out of necessity.

This article focusses on the issue of overstressing the sciences at the expense of the ‘non-sciences’. The alternative title of this article is, therefore, “In Defence of the ‘Non-sciences’. To drive the point home, I use the recent measures to combat Covid-19 in Uganda, where only sciences were relied upon. 

Specifically, I argue that because the processes neglected the ‘non-sciences’, the war against the pandemic is not to date as successful as it would have otherwise been. That is, I offer an explanation based on the neglect of the ‘non-sciences’ in the processes of initial introduction and subsequent implementation of the SOPs in the country. 

In particular, I argue that whereas a team of scientists was set up to guide the President and the public on all aspects of the Covid -19 pandemic, no team of ‘non-scientists’ was assembled—thereby creating a void, especially in the SOPs implementation process. This is the missing link.

The missing link

Although the President is surrounded by both scientists and ‘non-scientists’, he did not set up a counterpart team of economists, sociologists, political scientists, psychologists, lawyers, artistes, anthropologists, and other experts in cultural and behavioural sciences to partner with the scientists in the evolution and implementation of the SOPs. It was, in my view, wrongly assumed that the ‘non-scientists’ did/do not matter. 

This mistaken view that the ‘non-scientists’ are somehow inferior to scientists is, unfortunately, entertained by many people. For example, one respectable person recently had the audacity to insinuate that a specialist in music, dance and drama should not be entrusted with running the highest office in the land! 
Last week, another one, while appearing on UBC television on the Behind the Headlines programme, wondered why somebody would opt to study for a degree in psychology, rather than a diploma in the sciences. 

Can such people be convinced that just like a footballer (George Weah) is the President of Liberia and a film actor (Ronald Reagan) was a President of the United States in the 1970s, a ‘non-scientist’ can be as good an administrator, planner or leader as a scientist? Further, isn’t the President of Ukraine a comedian by profession? 

There is, therefore, need for mindset change from the stereotypes to current reality and modern thinking and philosophy.

How can policy concerned with public health not concern experts in the non-sciences’? Hence, although almost everybody in the country knows the seriousness and potential devastating impacts of Covid-19 on personal and community welfare and leisure and on the economy and life in general, the prescribed SOPs are not being strictly adhered to by many Ugandans. 

Passengers sanitise their hands before entering a Kampala-bound bus at Mbale Bus Park in August.PHOTO/FILE.

One, therefore, finds crowds at various political rallies, in various markets, especially Kampala and in other urban areas countrywide, at funerals, ‘introduction’ (okwanjula) and wedding ceremonies and du’as (Muslim supplication rituals) and at other ceremonies in both rural and urban areas—crowds not wearing facemasks and strictly observing other SOPs 
I visit my village in Butaleja District for cultural rearmament, rejuvenation and related activities quite often.

While there, I often attend funeral, wedding, du’as and other ceremonies while wearing my facemask, observing social distancing, avoiding shaking hands and not touching my MEN (mouth, eyes and nose), and so on. 

However, I have always observed that only a small minority of the attendants of such events do observe the SOPs—a percentage in the region of 5-10 per cent or less. Consequently, those of us who strictly observe SOPs always look out of place at such gatherings. In fact, a few people even have had the guts to tell me to my face that “If you do not die of Covid-19, you will still eventually die of old age or something else—for ‘death, a necessary end, will come when it will come’ (à là Shakespeare in his play, Julius Caesar). So, why so strict with SOPs?” 

This behaviour pattern appears to characterise most communities in Uganda; society in its daily activities has, in general, problems with strict adherence to SOPs. Why? Is it because of cultural norms and beliefs, superstitions, mere carelessness, lack of sensitisation aimed at bringing about mindset change, or general disregard of the ‘non-sciences’?

Way forward
A few lesson can be learnt from this neglect of the ‘non-sciences’ (the missing link), one being that they matter as much as the sciences. 
Further, a policy that ignores them at all stages from initiation to implementation is likely to be suboptimal—like using a model based on partial, rather than full, information. 

This means governments—in their activities like policy formulation, planning, sponsorship of students, handling of health, remuneration and other public (policy) issues and related matters—should put due emphasis on both subsets of knowledge: the  ‘sciences’ and ‘non-sciences’. These subsets are, after all, the two sides of the universal set of knowledge.

These issues should be reflected in science, education, health, agricultural, industrial and all other public policy activities since the two knowledge subsets are complementary to each other. Let’s look before we leap.

As for the SOPs, it is not too late to incorporate the ‘non-sciences’ in the existing packages. A team of ‘non-scientists’ should be constituted to advise on how society can be persuaded, not coerced, to strictly observe the SOPs. 
Besides, one should ensure that future policy and other activities should take into account the fact that both scientists and ‘non-scientists’ are needed—maybe in equal measure—in policy issues and the socio-economic development of our country.

Finally, I am very disappointed by the lack of voices from the ‘non-scientists’ of all walks of life (professors, lecturers, lawyers, sociologists, political scientists, psychologists, journalists, musicians and other artistes, religious leaders and other theologists, historians, and so on)—in defence of their spheres of influence. Have they forgotten the contributions to knowledge and prosperity of individuals such as Aristotle, Plato, Socrates, Max Weber, Auguste Comte, Karl Marx, Sigmund Freud, Thomas Kuhn, Karl Popper, Charles Peirce, Paul Feyerabend, Adam Smith, John Maynard Keynes, Milton Friedman, W.W. Rostow and the like? Please, ‘non-scientists’ rise up and (peacefully) defend your professions, value and activities. You have nothing to lose but the yoke or knees that have been placed on your necks.

Why ‘non-sciences’ matter
The ‘non-sciences’ essentially matter a lot in all aspects of society. This is illustrated by the following set of questions and answers:
What are the salient features of Ugandan communities vis-à-vis the ‘wretched of the earth’ (the poor) versus the rich, or the proletariat versus the bourgeoisie, or those living in poverty-stricken areas of the country (like Butaleja District that does not have even a single tarmac road) versus those living in ‘affluent’ areas, and so on? 

A man not wearing a facemask coughs amidst a crowd in Kampala in August. PHOTO/FILE.

Of course, theories of the widening gap between the ‘haves’ and ‘have-nots’, class struggle, considerably wide gaps in income/wealth distributions amongst individuals and across regions of the country, urban versus rural areas/life and others along these lines would come to mind here. This is basically the political economy approach to the issue.

Besides, these inequity and other income/wealth distribution issues are relevant not only to health policy matters but also to the security of the country. Marxist analysis of class struggle and related issues comes to mind in this case.

Can the ‘wretched of the earth’ have extra financial resources to afford masks, sanitisers, clean water and soap for constant washing of hands, and so on—given that most of them can hardly afford two meals a day? Can they observe social distancing in the visibly crowded slums where many of them live? Here, economics and sociology issues again come to the fore. Experts to deal with removal of superstitions and mindset change—in addition to economists and other ‘non-scientists’—are the in-thing here.

Does the government have, or can it mobilise, adequate resources to provide free of charge, masks, soap, clean water, sanitisers, unemployment benefits during lockdowns and related facilities and services to those persons that cannot afford them on their own? Note that even the facemasks promised by government have not reached numerous homes in both rural and urban areas several months after they were supposed to have reached them.

This is again an issue of economics (the budget, etc.) plus governance aspects.

What are the basic cultural issues that should be dealt with in implementing the SOPs? In a number of communities in this and other African countries, hardly anybody dies of old age, an accident, cancer, malaria, HIV/Aids, pneumonia, high blood pressure, diabetes, tuberculosis, or any other disease. One dies because one has been bewitched.

Thus, one needs a mindset-change; there is definite need to sensitise people on the seriousness of the pandemic and the need for strictly observing the SOPs. This is the work of various experts such as sociologists, psychologists, behaviour-change specialists and other experts in the ‘non-sciences’.

Mr President, those surrounding you should have advised you appropriately on these matters touching on the role of the ‘non-sciences’ in the realm of policy initiation, formulation, promulgation, implementation and coordination. If they did not, they must have assumed that you are aware of all these aspects of the issue; if not, they are too scared of you—for reasons best known to themselves—that they had no guts to draw your attention to these crucial issues.

Prof Mukwanason A. Hyuha is the head, Centre for Critical Thinking and Alternative Analysis