Background

In this article I want to apply the concepts of environment, ecology and ecosystem to business and entrepreneurship. Note, however, that I am not the first to do this. Many business and entrepreneurship schools have done so. I am probably the first trained in ecology, ecological techniques and environmental management and conservation in the Biology of Conservation at the University of Nairobi in the very early 1980s, to do so.

Luckily, the programme also included courses on Social Science for Conservation Biologists and Political Science for Conservation Biologists, which enabled me to link the natural sciences, humanities and social sciences in the conservation and management of the environment. It thus enabled me to view the enterprise beyond the natural sciences and also expanded my capacity to think critically and reason critically.

Indeed, this background of mine was critical when, in 2019, Prof Hyuha Mukwanason, Mr Mahir Balunywa and myself innovated the idea of Center for Critical Thinking and Alternative Analysis, to create an escape route for the graduates in the academic disciplines to think and reason beyond the boundaries of their disciplines. 

Critical thinking involves identifying, evaluating, and constructing arguments. Reasoning: The ability to infer a conclusion from one or multiple premises. To do so requires examining logical relationships among statements or data. Critical thinking is a scientific method. It is at the heart of the scientific method. Specifically, behind the process of designing, executing and interpreting the experiment is an adherence to deductive and inductive reasoning. The key critical thinking skills are identifying biases, inference, research, identification, curiosity, and judging relevance.

Let me commence the article with a discourse on science as a multidimensional enterprise and concept.

I think let me begin by evoking Isaac Newton, who in 1686 wrote a manuscript which he submitted to the Royal Society. The first chapter of the manuscript came to be known as the Principia. In this Newton established not only the foundations of mechanics but also conjured the principles of reason and logic, which formed the basis of our understanding of scientific inquiry. Subsequently, in the final chapter of Principia, those notions became rules of reason, opened with the claim of scientific philosophy that “we are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances.”

By the theoretical descendants of those rules, the modern scientific method was born. Since then, the scientific method has guided the spirit of inquiry, growing with the endeavour of science. As we look to the future of environmental science, we must also consider how the evolving scientific method will shape that future (Lewis, 2023).

Lewis (2023) has examined the past and potential future of the scientific process, as well as ways to integrate systems thinking, interdisciplinary approaches, and public engagement through scientific literacy. He talks of the need to consider how the evolving scientific method will shape that future of environmental science.

In the modern day, the idea of what it means for science to be rigorous and empirical is borne out not through discussion papers at the Royal Society, but through the work of environmental scientists and the best practice they apply to their work. Lewis (2023) concludes: “The future of the scientific method has all the potential to elevate that practice and reinvigorate the public’s passion for scientific endeavour. Ultimately, it falls to the work of environmental scientists to embody the kind of science that brings that passion to life”.

The Science council defines science as the pursuit and application of knowledge and understanding of the natural and social world following a systematic methodology based on evidence. Scientific methodology includes the following: objective observation, measurement and data (possibly although not necessarily using mathematics as a tool) and evidence.

Science is one. However, academic knowledge workers, who work by academicising knowledge, divide knowledge into small pockets called academic disciplines or academic tribes, which they then group together into three different territories of knowledge, namely: natural sciences, social sciences and humanities (or arts). They specialise and develop therein in different professions and careers.

Joseph Renzulli of the University of Connecticut in the US has submitted that “academicising simply means infusing into a cluster scholarly material and the know-how of professionals that can be found in reference and web-based resources that approximate the ways in which experts in a particular field go about studying a topic. Any topic, from basket weaving to making brownies can be made more academically rigorous. Basket weaving can involve geometry, the experimental testing of materials and the comparative study of cultures and creative arts between various groups”.

Academic knowledge is a specific form of knowledge that has characteristics that differentiate it from other kinds of knowledge, and particularly from knowledge or beliefs based solely on direct personal experience in the total environment. Therefore, academic knowledge is not all the knowledge that is available to humanity to fit in the total environment or bring about societal change. In any case, academic knowledge prefers to concentrate on small knowledges mainly for self-glorification, narrow but deep specialisation and careerism. 

In summary, academic knowledge is a second order form of knowledge that seeks abstractions and generalisations based on reasoning and evidence. Fundamental components of academic knowledge are: transparency, codification, reproduction and communicability. In a knowledge-based society, knowledge that leads to innovation and commercial activity is now recognised as critical to economic development. Again, there is a tendency to argue that this kind of knowledge – commercial knowledge – is different from academic knowledge, although commerce has been academicised.

Agamenon R. E. Oliveira (2020), in the article “All sciences are human and no science is exact”, has shown that all scientific areas are interconnected, implying that the results obtained in the technological areas depend on other sciences and even on philosophy by the very nature of scientific knowledge. Furthermore, the established separation of disciplines, which is made by universities, placing human sciences on one side and exact sciences on the other, is questionable and insufficient to account for the complexity in the classification of sciences. It needs further epistemological deepening.

Whatever the case, I do not intend to make my article on the above-mentioned topic too academic since it is about the practical and applied areas of business and entrepreneurship although business education and entrepreneurship have also been academicised.

In Uganda we have a whole university college called Makerere University Business School (MUBS) producing academics and professionals up to the highest level of academic specialisation. It also teaches entrepreneurship. In fact, MUBS is described as “The centre which provides in-house business incubation services focusing on resident business incubatees and entrepreneurship training to university students, innovative citizens and business startups in Uganda”.

If we accept that science is one, then we must embrace the idea that it consists of three mutually inclusive dimensions – the natural sciences dimension, the social sciences dimension and the humanities dimension. According to the science council scienceis the pursuit and application of knowledge and understanding of the natural and social world, following a systematic methodology, based on evidence.

A daictionary definition of natural science is that “It is the branch of knowledge that deals with the study of the physical world” or “a branch of science that deals with the physical world”

The natural sciences are astronomy, biology, physics, chemistry, geology. Together the natural sciences seek to understand how the world and universe to which we are integral work. Astronomy is the study of everything in the universe beyond Earth’s atmosphere. That includes objects we can see with our naked eyes, like the Sun, the Moon, the Planets, and the stars. Biology is the science of life and living organisms. Physics is the branch of science that deals with the structure of matter and how the fundamental constituents of the universe interact. It studies objects ranging from the very small using quantum mechanics to the entire universe using general relativity. is a physical science within the natural sciences that studies the chemical elements that make up matter and compounds made of atoms, molecules and ions: their composition, structure, properties, behavior and the changes they undergo during reactions with other substances. Geology means ‘Study of the Earth’. Also known as geoscience or earth science, geology is the primary Earth science and looks at how the earth formed, its structure and composition, and the types of processes acting on it.

Social science is the scientific study of human society and social relationships. There are eight disciplines of social science. Seven of those social sciences are: anthropology, archaeology, economics, history, geography, linguistics and psychology. Apparently, geography and law are also sometimes included among the social sciences.

Xinyang Wang (2018) writes that “as two important fields of the human academic activities, the humanities and social science are both different and inherently unified. The differences between the humanities and social science mainly include the following three aspects: first, the objectives of the humanities and social science are different. Second, the thinking orientations of humanities and social science are different. Third, humanities and social science are thinking in different ways. For the unity of the humanities and social science, we can understand it from the following three aspects: first of all, humanities and social science are internally correlated in the research object. Secondly, humanities and social science restrict and guide each other in the process and results of exploration. Furthermore, humanities and social science dialectically complement each other in the spiritual ethos”. In the same way that natural sciences test and conduct research and produce knowledge to better understand the physical world in which we live, social scientists conduct research and produce knowledge that aid to better inform about the social world we all partake in.

Natalia Safontseva (2023), writing on “the dualistic unity of natural science and the humanities”, suggests adopting the experience of other countries in implementing the interdisciplinary approach to the educational process. It is, however, important to recognise and appreciate the significance of other new and different knowledge production strategies or cultures as alternative approaches to the educational process in the 21st century and beyond, namely: crossdisciplinarity, transdisciplinarity and extradisciplinarity (or nondisciplinarity).

All humans are social, and in each science, humans associate socially to carry out their work.  When in this article I talk of the sciences, I mean the humanities, the natural sciences and the social sciences. In order to effectively understand and appreciate the workings of Nature and Society we need to pursue the practice of unification of the sciences – natural science, humanities and social science (e.g., Asante Boyce, 2020). The unification cannot be achieved through disciplinarity or multidisciplinarity (which is glorified disciplinarity) but interdisciplinarity, crossdisciplinarity, transdisciplinarity and extradisciplinarity (nondisciplinarity). The most effective unification is through the latter, which does not recognise the disciplines (or academic tribes).

Asante Boyce (2020), “To neglect the interrelationship between the natural and social sciences [and for that matter natural science and humanities] would create limitations in our understanding of the applications of both sciences within our universe. Instead of separating the subjects, we should try and use them to define our universes characteristics, with human consciousness being an important way of us being able to define our position further. I have always believed that the integration of the social sciences would have a great impact on the research produced, as different perspectives and understandings could establish valuable answers to a lot of social ‘mysteries”.

Asante Boyce (2020) also discusses the definitions and the differences between the natural and social sciences, but also thinks there are also similarities. Where it is applicable and feasible, he says, “the same integration could be done with all sciences. Biology explores the natural characteristics of humans and this could be useful in providing additional insight and background to social research questions and methods for human interactions in the social world”.

In the real world, the natural sciences, the humanities and the social sciences interact to make life livable and dynamic. For example, at television and radio stations, personnel from the natural sciences, the humanities and the social sciences integrate their knowledge, skills and experiences to make the stations influencial in all spheres of life in society by putting the scientific innovations to use. The same is true in music- dance – and drama-based businesses and entrepreneurships. The challenge in all spheres of life is turning scientific discoveries or innovations to impact the real-world and influence its dynamics..

• A Tell report / By Prof Oweyegha-Afunaduula, a former professor in the Department of Environmental Sciences of the Makerere University, Uganda. Prof Owegha-Afunaduula is also a cofounder of Centre for Critical Thinking and Alternative Analysis, Uganda