Value systems

Value systems

The article Researchers Need Encouragement (The Jakarta Post, Nov. 15, 1995) raises some important issues about value systems which I hope will lead to some lively discussion in "Your Letters". The foreigner coming to Indonesia is told that he must adjust his expectations and relationships to different ways of thinking.

Indonesia stoutly defends and promotes its own thought patterns, value systems, and way of doing things in the belief that its traditions and state philosophy are sacrosanct. Only within that framework will it adopt foreign concepts and ideals which are considered beneficial. Those concepts and ideals which are considered to be in conflict with the roots of the society are rejected, as indeed they are rejected in all countries feeling the pressure of dominant but alien ideas and culture.

For instance, my country as a general consensus rejects the imposition of any state philosophy or uniformity of belief. In contrast, Indonesia accepts this as an important influence for uniting its diverse peoples, while at the same time rejecting theocracy based on a single faith as dangerous.

The westerner needs to constantly remind himself that the consensus of free thought in his country is of quite recent origin. The fight for it began around 1500 AD when it was supported only by a small minority of intellectuals, such as we see in Indonesia today. Those intellectuals of long ago -- starting with Socrates in ancient Greece -- were persecuted, banished and burned in an attempt to repress their "corrupting" influence on the youth of the day. It led to bloody civil wars in Europe in the 16th and 17th centuries, followed by revolutions against autocratic authority in many countries right down to the 20th century. Such convulsions seem to have been almost a necessary part of their evolution, but naturally any young country today seeks to avoid them in its development. The question is, how? Certainly, repression was counterproductive in this respect for the history of Europe.

One of the consequences of free thinking was the development of the scientific method of investigating natural phenomena, spreading out in relatively recent times to cover all aspects of humanity such as our social habits, as in the instance quoted by Mochtar Buchori. A fundamental premise of the scientific method is that facts are paramount, and truth arises from analysis and interpretation of those facts by open minds unclouded by tradition, custom, religion or prejudice.

If the truth revealed in this way undermines beliefs and systems which are the current basis of the society, then it is the beliefs and systems which must change, not the scientific facts.

If this attitude and discipline is not fully accepted by the society, then it is pointless or extremely confusing to teach science in schools. Attitudes in Indonesia were gloriously characterized by Anwar Ibrahim in "Your Letters" last September, under the heading Time worry. Anything can be arranged.

In European history and probably for the whole world, the most famous case of the conflict between accepted norms and scientific facts was the discovery that the earth revolves around the sun, not the sun around the earth. The consequences for old belief systems which elevated man to the center of the universe (under God) were catastrophic and are still being felt.

A foreigner may not criticize, but it is perhaps permissible to ask questions. The students Mochtar referred to come from Madiun, but would it have been so different if their research had been conducted in Surabaya, where at least the academics appreciated their efforts?

I hope they have an opportunity to read about the life and teaching of Socrates, then they may be consoled that they are not the first -- nor the last -- to suffer for the truth.

TED SUTTON

Bengkulu, Sumatra