For centuries sailors and scientists have conversed over whether or not there exists a "giant" squid. We're not talking your Daddy's calamari, we're talking massive "Take on Jaws in an Epic Battle of Sea-Creature Supremacy" squid. Until last year it had been chatted about and discussed but with no proof. However, last year the mystery was unearthed.
The first Colossal Squid was captured intact last year. This week, the New York Times has released an article on the size of the squids eye-the largest eye in the world. The actual eye is the size of a dinner plate and the lens is as big as a orange.
While this article caught my normal sized eye because it reminded me of my father's discovery channel stories of a living sea monster, it made me think of another issue. For centuries people have claimed they have seen these creatures. For centuries there has been speculation. By why didn't the established population ever believe it? It was passed off as sea stories and lumped with aliens. People for years called the sailors crazed afficionados and passed off stories of ship destructions as poor sailing. Why didn't I ever really believe my dad when he told me stories of the giant squid?
The whole article just made me think of the role of communication. How I had never believed my father, or specials on the discovery channel, but because someone in a lab coat or a writer for the New York Times I believed it. I believed the article before I saw a picture. Before I saw the "proof." For me, I guess the proof was in the Grey Lady's reputation. That the NYT wouldn't publish something that wasn't fortified.
I think of the seamen who told their stories in bars and ports and were scoffed at. Unforunately, I think of the 14 year old version of myself rolling my eyes at my dad. Unforunately, I think of the role communication plays and how it is so often taken for granted. Well I apologize Colossal Squid. I will never doubt you again. Move over 'Nessy, there's a new sea monster and its got its ginormous, massive, look like the moon, dinner plate sized eyes on you...
3 comments:
I think it's interesting how an article like this makes you question how we define science. Something that we take as just tall-tales of sailors for years turns out to be real accounts and we must ask ourselves why didn't we believe these stories. Is it simply because they came from unscientific or unreliable sources? The way that we accept knowledge as being fact is an interesting process and central to the course we have been taking for the past semester. But maybe as we trust this system to give us the most reliable knowledge about our world, we should not discount information that flows from other sources.
I agree that this does raise some interesting questions about the esteemed position and definition of science in our culture. However, while science is often placed on a pedestal and scientists' methods are deemed so credible and trustworthy, are we simultaneously discounting other professions?
Say sailors were discussing this massive squid for decades or even centuries. Are they experts in their field in the sense that the spend so much time studying the ocean and its organisms? Though they study the ocean in a different manner, should they still be given some credibility and used as a source of proof? I think science is the necessary means and end to a discovery, but I do wonder about the counter-productiveness and time delays in doubting such claims of a massive squid.
Giant squid are really cool creatures and I think it's so interesting how little we know about them. The topic of science and culture is definitely interesting, especially in terms of "scientific" folklore. I think it's really cool to see people's fascination with creatures from the deep.
Post a Comment