Indigenous knowledge is also science

Tangaroa-ā-roto Akuhata 2021

The letter to the Listener last week positions itself with the authority of the authors, 7 Professors/ Professors Emeritus (now retired, Professor for life) at the University of Auckland. The proposed changes at NCEA level to create a “parity” of mātauranga Māori and science is what has seemingly inspired the letter. We are told “this (the proposed changes) perpetuates disturbing misunderstandings of science emerging at all levels of education and science funding.” Hang on, where? Oh, that is not detailed. ?A conspiracy theory atmosphere is created, by these scientists. The irony.

?

The premise is that if indigenous knowledge has equivalence with science then this leads to mistrust of science and “we cannot afford mistrust of science” as science contributes “immense good” and our future depends on science. Somehow indigenous knowledge being seen,being taught, being funded on a par with science compromises our very future. Sounds very serious.

?

Nowhere in the letter do we see a definition of what science is, or isn’t for these authors.?A dictionary ?definition says, “science is an intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment”. Mātauranga Māori is science by this definition, and the lives of our ancestors depended on their science.

?

The authors take up a fair amount of the letter refuting the “Western science” term and reminding readers of the various non-Western cultures who have contributed to science. No where do they mention Māori science. The science of our navigation, the technology of the fastest ocean going vessels of their time, the astronomy more recently made widely available via Dr Rangi Matamua’s work, to give a few examples. ?All drawing on the Māori science of our tūpuna, this does not get a mention. Nor do they mention the research on racism, at all levels of science education and funding, areas they seem to have concerns about.

?

The authors clearly state as far as they are concerned indigenous knowledge is not science. How do they know that? Not one of the authors is an expert in mātauranga or indigneous knowledge.

?

There is the sweeping generalisation, “science is universal” dicto simpliciter is the Latin for this. Dicto. Indeed. If it is universal then why the worry about sharing the resources with indigenous science, is that not part of the universality of science?

?

Let’s get one thing straight. There is no such thing as a universally “good” science, as these authors well know. As Richard Horton the editor of the medical journal The Lancet said in 2015, “ the case against science is straightforward; much of the scientific literature perhaps half may simply be untrue”. He cited small sample sizes, invalid analyses, conflicts of interest to name a few reasons why.

?

“Mistrust of science” is the concern of the authors and is a loaded term. In this context the threat is that something bad will happen to you if you don’t trust science. The tactic indicates you either trust science or you don’t. You are with us, in our authority at University of Auckland or you are against us, is the inference.

?

The authors want to make sure we know their view about science and colonisation. Yes, they agree science was used in colonisation. And so was literature and art, so don’t pick on poor old science!

?

I resigned my small contract at UoA on Friday. The arguments made are, to my way of thinking, unscientific in themselves. The impact of this letter in further marginalising Māori staff and risking the cultural safety of our students stuns me in one sense and sadly is also not a surprise.

?

For me this is the academic version of “stop ramming Māori language down our throats.” The answer is, we are not stopping.

?

This letter is also helpful in that it reveals the extent of ongoing attempts by some to defend against what looks like their perception of losing power and control, and funding.