Abstract
Some people count imaginary sheep jumping a fence to help them drift off to sleep, but last night I found myself reliving a YouTube video showing Arctic lemmings jumping off a cliff to their death. 1 The video was taken from the Walt Disney documentary, the White Wilderness, which was released in 1958 and received an Academy Award. 2 Truthfully, it did not help me sleep at all, but as I counted the unfortunate lemmings jump, I did gain some insights into the challenges associated with scientific discovery.
The Arctic lemming is a small mouse-like creature that lives in the tundra and has intermittent population explosions that force them to migrate to search for food. It has been commonly accepted that when this happens, that the lemmings may follow the lemming in front of it wherever it would go, including jumping off cliffs to their death. One might view this as a graphic example of how blind faith or trust in others can lead to extremely unfortunate consequences.
Blind faith can also impact the field of science. A great example comes from studies of the human chromosome. In 1923, a zoologist by the name of Theophilus Painter reported, based on microscopy, that humans had 48 chromosomes. 3 For the next 30 years, there were numerous reports confirming these findings from various laboratories in the world. 4 Indeed, in 1954, Dr Leo Sachs from the Weizmann Institute of Science in Israel wrote ‘the diploid chromosome number of 48 in man can now be considered an established fact’. 5 Yet, just two years later, two scientists based in Lund, Sweden, Joe Hin Tjio and Albert Levan, reported that there was an error in the counting and that the actual number of chromosomes in humans was 46. 6
One might ask how scientists could incorrectly count the number of human chromosomes for 30 or more years. Certainly, the technique was difficult in those days, and hence it is possible that they represent innocent errors. However, the fact that at least nine different groups counted the same number raises the possibility to this author that it is easy to be trapped into seeing what one wants to see, of having bias from preconceived ideas, and of not wanting to challenge that which has been published if one obtains conflicting data.
At one level, one might view the repeated error in counting chromosomes as a type of lemming phenomenon in which we take for faith what we have been taught to the point that we ignore that which is right in front of our eyes. However, the ‘lemming phenomenon’ has another twist, and that is the belief that lemmings can commit mass suicide is more folklore than truth. The idea that lemmings perform such behaviour became so common in the lay literature that many viewed this finding as established. Yet studies of the biology of lemmings suggest they do not jump from cliffs or do other group behaviours that lead to intentional or unintentional death. 7 Indeed, the documentary produced by Disney in 1956 was staged, with captured lemmings dumped from a truck on the edge of the cliff and then forced to jump off the cliff.2,7 Thus, the lemming phenomenon has another meaning, for it is also an example that what we are taught may not always be true.
‘Blind faith’ is not just a challenge for scientists, but for anyone seeking the truth, especially if the ideas challenge common conceptual views. When Copernicus proposed that it was the earth that revolved around the sun and not the reverse, he was challenged by many learned men who were unable to accept the new science that Copernicus was presenting. Indeed, Martin Luther lamented ‘That fool wants to turn the whole art of astronomy upside-down’. Many other examples exist, of which one of the worst was the maniacal blind faith, the Branch Davidians showed for their leaders in the siege at Waco, TX, that led to many deaths.
A challenge in science is how to present new concepts that challenge orthodoxy and ‘fixed thinking’. Often people presenting new ideas are paraded as individuals who simply do not understand the currently accepted scientific view. In this regard, these individuals can suffer attack not only from those with moderate views but also from the extremists on either end. Thus, the person presenting a new idea will be challenged by the dogmatic individual who only accepts what he or she has learned in the past, and conversely, the individual may also be challenged by sceptics (or pundits) who cannot accept any new ideas unless they thought of it themselves or unless there are ‘more data’. Both of these extreme attitudes can act to freeze scientific advancement. The ‘lemming phenomenon’ is an example for those of us who are in the mainstream and who are at risk of thinking we know more than we do. Indeed, we all need to be open to the possibility that even the most basic principles we have been taught may need to be periodically questioned.
Mark Twain once said, ‘I’ve never let my school interfere with my education’. Perhaps we can learn from him. In the meanwhile, tonight I will try to shift my thoughts to jumping sheep. At least they do not seem to get hurt based on what I know – but perhaps this needs to be studied rigorously!