Much has been talked about the differences in methodology and ways of investigation in the social sciences and sciences. Early thinkers like Max Weber have talked about problem of values in social sciences and sciences. Immanuel Wallerstein in his book "Open the Social Sciences: Report of the Gulbenkian Commission on the Restructuring of the Social Sciences (1996)" points out the historical development and restructuring of Social Sciences as discipline with respect to Natural Sciences. He asserts that the tension created between the arts (humanities) and sciences with the rise of royal academics in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries and the creation of ‘grandes ecoles’ by Napolean, can be mitigated via bringing scholars from different disciplines to work together on specific themes in universities. Contemporary political philosophers like Martha Nussbaum also show concern about the decreasing importance of humanities and social sciences and why they are important for propagating democratic citizenship. But C. P. Snow's book Two Cultures (1964) presents a totally different perspective to view this gap and such a unique vision contributes to the book’s fascinating appeal to the readers.

The Two Cultures* engages the reader's attention immediately and provokes her to think deeply about the interrelation between science and humanities. Based on the thesis proposed by British novelist and scientist Charles Percy Snow's Rede Lecture in 1959, this book addresses one of the age-old as well intriguing debates regarding the academic cultures. Snow’s book is his critical evaluation of the practicing sciences and practicing literary discourses as two separate ‘cultures.’ Discussing the different attributes, he examines the rigidity of boundaries between the two cultures and the subsequent problems that are caused by this demarcation.

In definite terms Snow tries to historically trace and examine this problem. Mainly divided into two parts, the first part of the book centralizes the main argument in four chapters. These chapters discuss about the two cultures, intellectuals as natural Luddites, the scientific revolution and finally about the economic discrepancy between the rich and the poor. Defending the original argument, the second part was added in the second edition and earnestly engages with all the criticism and comments after its publication in 1959. What is significant is Snow’s approach in understanding this problem in this book.

Close observation of both the academic streams and intimacy with scientists and writers inform Snow's vision in this book. In his own words: "By training I was a scientist: by vocation I was a writer". Unlike earlier writers, Snow claims that his personal intimacy had helped him to understand the difference more authentically. The book advances the thesis that though scientists and writers are comparable in intelligence, identical in race, with similar income level and not grossly different in social origin, yet are like `two cultures' with unbridgeable gaps. What is more surprising, according to Snow, is that each culture constructs distorted images of the other in an arbitrary manner. Quite tellingly, Snow depicts this breach and the apathetic attitude which is really alarming in today's world. In the present world where science and social science disciplines often quarrel about their relevance in the market economy, Snow’s book urges the intellectuals to think about their convictions. His deep insight into the problem has even jolted me out of complacency.

In lucid manner, Snow shows that the literary intellectuals have a deep rooted bias that the scientists lack humanitarian sympathies. The governing assumption is that scientists, though pragmatic and optimistic, are shallow in matters of general human and social concerns. On the other hand, scientists believe that literary intellectuals lack foresight and are without social commitments. Denigrating the non-scientists, the scientists do not recognize their talent and social roles. Moreover, solitariness being one of the attendant crises in the lives of all intellectuals, the general belief is that the scientists have the capacity to be more optimistic and vivacious even in midst of this. Temperamentally inclined to pursue something productive, the scientists aspire to indulge themselves in some sort of positive action. Literature, lacking this corrective drive often fails to situate itself according to pragmatic demands. As claimed by Snow, this biased opinion is one of the predominating factors in creating the gap between science and social science. Although Snow has discussed about only two cultures, he also portrays the pure scientists and engineers as of different cultural groups. Several other writers have criticized him for being restricted to only two cultures. Manifestly, he has asserted the possibility of a third culture which is in process but he has not eloquently articulated anything about it. Significantly, following this postulation in 1995 John Brockman published "The Third Culture: Beyond the Scientific Revolution" as testifying to third culture speculations.

Entitling the community of scientists as a `culture', Snow describes the common attitudes, standards, pattern of behavior, approaches and assumptions that go on to construct the community monolithic in nature. The homogeneity also pervades in their emotional life, as Snow observes. This gap polarizes the academic minds and Snow narrates how the integration of these cultures can be really beneficial for human society. Prominently pervading in England, this cultural distinction is broadly due to two reasons: fanatical belief in educational specialization and profound crystallization of social norms. Comparing the educational system of America, USSR and Britain, Snow found in USSR favorable environment for science education and research. He, however, credits for this the Russian novelists who attempt to bridge the gap between the two cultures.

Snow's book also offers interesting insights into the role that scientific culture plays in materializing the industrial revolution. For him literary intellectuals are natural Luddites, referring to the group which went around breaking machinery at the outset of the industrial revolution. During that time literary and traditional culture focused in training young men for administrative purposes in Indian empire, thereby consolidating colonial concerns. Mourning this, Snow urges that if his ancestors (British) had invested talent in the industrial revolution rather than strengthening colonial empires, his culture might be more soundly based at present. However, industrial revolution which was neglected in traditional culture had directly benefited the poor by providing better facilities of health, education and food. Out of these changes emerged another transformation and that is the application of science to industry like in electronics, atomic energy and automation, which had decisively effected the world and gave impetus to the 'scientific revolution'.

Most importantly, this book also carries strong undertones of a welfarist mission. This becomes evident in Snow's vision to extend his arguments to the social crisis between rich and poor countries. He observes that the widening gap between rich and poor countries can be eradicated only by providing capital from outside to the poor countries. Besides this, trained scientists and engineers adaptable enough to a foreign country must devote themselves for at least ten years for improving the conditions. For this he expects the developed countries especially USSR and America to assume pioneering roles and send assistance in the form of developing scientific culture in the poor countries. Moreover this book testifies to the fact that Snow is also concerned about the preservation of culture. Undue domination of one culture over other can prove detrimental to any society. Snow carefully navigates this debate to expose why emphasis on 'one' culture is not desirable. This is because the literary intellectuals do not make the decisions but often their assertions have deep impact on human minds, thereby indirectly influencing people's thoughts. In a similar fashion, scientists can also be bad advisors to the policy makers. Informed mainly by two motives, that of understanding the natural world and consequently controlling it, Snow cautions about the predominance of any of these motives in the individual scientist. Therefore privileging of one culture over other is sure to create disharmony if seen in the larger social context.

So, after a sweeping glance at the book, I am really inspired to consider this book as one of the first initiatives about making sciences more humanitarian. Snow’s critical observations and his visionary stance become more relevant when reviewed in the present globalized context. In a pluralistic world, marked by neo-liberal economy and driven by the competitive mentality, Snow’s book foregrounds a fitting example of reciprocal relations between humanities and science. Mutually reinforcing each other, science and humanities can offer more suitable models for societal development. Whereas science can provide rationalized way for attending and solving practical problems, study of humanities can rejuvenate a comprehensive way of judging and providing solutions for larger debates in the society. Suggestively, various institutes across the world have been following this model, which underlines the equal status of science and social science discipline. The Indian Institute of Technology exemplifies this most manifestly in India. It is a common assumption that IITs are meant only for technical education. But this is a misconception. IITs also have humanities and social science departments which are really flourishing and aim to develop critical perspectives to understand the social issues. Nonetheless the recent plans of introducing medical courses in the IITs and humanities departments in medical institutes can also be seen as inspiring instances validating Snow’s theoretical arguments. Not only for inculcating the values of tolerance and empathy but also for implanting a strong historic at sense of humanity in general, these steps are vital in today’s world. The unification and mutual respect of one culture towards other, which Snow envisions, thus has become inevitable to adopt and actualize for a holistic development of society. This is where the intellectual appeal of the book resides even after five decades. Though dealing mainly about 'two cultures', yet by dint of its powerful arguments and humanistic outlook, the book is a must read for people from every culture in present day.

*Snow, C.P. (1964). The Two Cultures and a Second Look: An expanded version of the two cultures and the scientific revolution. Cambridge University Press: London. Pages 107.

Sarvendra Yadav
Research Scholar
Department of Humanities & Social Sciences
Indian Institute of Technology