When I first read Martinez Alfaro’s “Intertextuality,” the concept of all texts arising from previous texts immediately reminded me of the cell theory; all cells arise from preexisting cells. Then, discovering the title of this week’s chapter of Interdisciplinarity, “Science, Space and Nature,” I was intrigued by what Moran could possibly say regarding this topic. Moran extensively discusses the concept of empiricism: the theory that all knowledge is derived from the sense experience. He opens his discussion by explaining that “Science’s self confidence has traditionally stemmed from its self-limitations…” (pg 137) From what I understand, scientific concepts are only as valid as the evidence that supports it. Science is taught as a “universal truth” according to Paul Feyerabend and he argues that there is no freedom to dissent from scientific knowledge. (pg 140) Although Moran depicts the separation between the sciences and literature, I believe they are inherently the same.
Science in its rawest form is “framed, discussed, and solved” (pg 141) Is literature not framed, discussed and solved as well? In science there is an existing problem or question, and as the scientist you formulate a hypothesis one may either challenge or agree with. Literature is the same. During the age of Enlightenment, Martin Luther challenged the Catholic Church with his experimental The Ninety-Five Thesis. Harriet Beecher Stowe challenged the concept of slavery with her novel Uncle Tom’s Cabin. Each work of literature at the time seemed blasphemous, and yet didn’t each new scientific concept introduced to society seem just as ludicrous also? By reading this chapter, I have a fuller understanding of how the disciplines actually intertwine.