Professor Jerry Coyne: Why Mātauranga Māori Isn’t Science

A interview with a “heterodox” New Zealand scientist - “Why Mātauranga Māori Isn’t Science:”

I’ve written a lot about the controversy in New Zealand involving whether the indigenous “way of knowing,” Mātauranga Māori (MM), is equivalent to modern science (often called “Western science”) and, as many maintain, should be taught alongside modern in science classes (see all my posts here).

As I’ve noted, because MM does have elements of empirical truth in it, like information (established by trial and error) about how to catch eels, when berries are ripe, and so on, it is characterized as a “way of knowing”.

But because MM also incorporates elements of religion, ethics, mythology, legend, vitalism, and even outright falsehoods, it is not equivalent to modern science. One example is the unsubstantiated claim that the Polynesians (ancestors of the Māori) discovered Antarctica in the seventh century, and that a microbial infection of New Zealand’s kauri trees might be cured by playing whale songs to the trees and rubbing them with whale oil and pulverized whale bones (the myth here is that the kauri and whales were once “brothers” but then became separated; the trees are dying because they’ve lost their brothers).

And the empirical content of MM is, as Quillette’s Iona Italia says in her excellent interview video (below) with evolutionary ecologist Kendall Clements of the University of Auckland, consists solely of “intimate local knowledge,” lacking elements of modern science (hypothesis testing, pervasive doubt, theory, the use of mathematics, attempts to explain why things are as they are). Teaching MM as equivalent to modern science, then, is not only misguided, but also inimical to the education of New Zealanders, including Māori students themselves.

Kendall was one of the signers of the infamous 2021 Listener Letter: (see the text here), a letter rejected from New Zealand scientific journals before it was accepted in a magazine called “The Listener”. It made exactly the points I’ve reprised above, but it wasn’t received well. Many Kiwis, including Māori themselves, totally rejected the authors’ thesis, saying that modern science was an instrument of colonialism and should be balanced with “local science”.

But promoting MM as equal to science, it seems, was a way of sacralizing the indigenous Māori—a form of “affirmative education” that, in the end, will mis-educate students and erode science teaching in New Zealand. While teaching what’s in MM can be useful in sociology or anthropology classes (a point made by the Listener authors), it does not belong in science classes. Nevertheless, all university students in New Zealand, including science students, will be compelled to take courses that, at the least, do not show that MM is NOT science. The controversy is simply ignored. And the authors of the Listener letter have been largely demonized, with some of them losing professional perquisites, like the right to teach certain classes.

The interview below, though it’s nearly 90 minutes long, is in my view the best existing discussion and critique of the idea that MM should be seen as a “way of knowing” equivalent to modern science. I’d recommend listening to it if you have any interest not only in New Zealand in particular, but in how indigenous “ways of knowing” are diluting science in general. After all, the same clash is happening elsewhere, including South Africa and Canada. And in all of these places modern science is denigrated as being a tool of white colonialism.

Here are the YouTube notes:

Should mythology be taught alongside the scientific method in science class?

In this provocative episode, host Iona Italia speaks with Kendall Clements, a biology professor at the University of Auckland, about the ideological push to equate Mātauranga Māori—traditional Māori knowledge—with science in New Zealand classrooms and universities. Clements recounts the academic backlash he faced after defending science in a now-famous letter to The Listener magazine.

Together, they explore the difference between cultural knowledge and scientific epistemology, the dangers of politicising education, and the importance of institutional neutrality. This wide-ranging conversation touches on Karl Popper, the meaning of academic freedom, and why placing belief systems above critique risks eroding both science and tradition.

Both Kendall and Iona are informed and eloquent, so have a listen:


Click to view

Professor Jerry Coyne is an American biologist known for his work on speciation and his commentary on intelligent design, a prolific scientist and author. This article was first published HERE