Science and Innovation

David Bueno i Torrens is a biologist, professor, and researcher at the University of Barcelona, specializing in genetics, neuroscience, and evolution. He is a renowned science communicator with a long track record of bringing science to the public through books, articles, and media collaborations. He has authored several works on neuroeducation and the science of human behavior, presenting scientific knowledge to society in a clear and rigorous manner. He was awarded the 2025 Josep Pla Prize for his essay El arte de ser humanos, making it the first popular science book to receive this recognition.

How did your journey from studying developmental genetics and neuroscience lead you to science communication?

I’ve always been interested in science communication, even from a young age. In fact, I still have a lot of popular science books from my teenage years—about space, nature, mathematics, physics… So, in a way, I was already drawn to it from the beginning. I was passionate about science not only as a scientist, which is now my profession, but also as a communicator—as a tool to share with society all the discoveries being made. Because, in the end, these discoveries have an impact on society, on individuals, and on how our environment functions. I started out in developmental genetics because I was deeply interested in it, and as soon as I had the opportunity, I made science communication part of my daily work as well.

Genetics and neuroscience play a central role in understanding human behavior. What recent discoveries do you find most relevant for understanding how we think and act?

Some of the most relevant recent discoveries include, on one hand, the influence of genes on human behavior—on our genetic programs. But it’s an influence, not genetic determinism. That is, genes set certain predispositions in our character: predispositions to be more empathetic, more creative, more intelligent, more impulsive, more reflective… basically, any mental trait you can imagine. There’s always a genetic background that makes people more or less predisposed.

However, what’s important to me is that our brain—being a plastic and malleable organ (and here is where genetics connects with neuroscience)—is shaped by the experiences we have, by the life we live, even by the thoughts we think. So, an environment that encourages, say, creativity, can make people who are genetically less predisposed to it become much more creative than others who, despite having a stronger genetic predisposition, grow up in a family, school, or social environment that stifles or limits that creativity.

And the same goes for sociability, empathy, or any other mental trait. To me, this interplay between genetics and brain plasticity is one of the most significant findings for understanding how we think and act—and also for discovering how we can improve our educational systems.

In your latest book, El arte de ser humanos, you explore what makes us human from a scientific perspective. What are the key elements that define our essence as a species?

In this latest book, I ask precisely that question: what makes us human from a scientific point of view? As a biological species, we’ve named ourselves Homo sapiens, which means “people who think” or “who can acquire knowledge.” And that’s entirely true—but we are not the only species that thinks or acquires knowledge. Many other mammals—especially other primates—also learn about their environment and adapt their behavior accordingly.

So “sapiens” is not exclusive to us. We do possess it at an extraordinarily higher level than any other species, without a doubt, but it’s not what makes us unique. What does make us unique is art. We are the only artistic species capable of creating art, of refining art, of using art to understand the environment, to communicate ideas, to innovate. We are the only species on Earth—based on what we know from pictorial, fossil, and other records—capable of producing art. That’s why in the book, I play with the non-canonical idea that maybe we should call ourselves Homo artisticus. Homo sapiens is fine, but that’s the concept. Art makes us human—we wouldn’t be human without it. We think as we do, innovate as we do, because we have art and create art.

And by the way, besides the traditional arts—visual, musical, performing—I also include science and philosophy as forms of art. Because they engage the brain in very similar ways, I believe they also belong to humanity’s artistic legacy.

In addition to being a scientist, you are a university professor. What do you enjoy most about teaching, and how do you think the way we teach science has evolved?

What I enjoy most about teaching is being able to share knowledge with my students. And I say “share,” not just “transmit,” because yes, I do transmit knowledge, but they also teach me. Being around students aged 18, 20, 25—people half my age—is enriching for me. It helps me better understand today’s society through what they show me. And that’s what I enjoy most: sharing knowledge with them.

The way we teach science has changed in a very important way. A few decades ago, teaching relied on rote memorization—just learning things without much reasoning. Now, the emphasis is much more on reasoning. That doesn’t mean we don’t need to learn things—we absolutely do, at any age—but not “just because.” We need to learn so we can apply knowledge in a contextual, practical, and skill-based way—what in education is called “competency-based learning”—to new, dynamic, changing situations. And it’s that combination, that balance between learning content and knowing how to apply it, that gives education its full power.

Many of your books explore neuroeducation and how the brain learns. You talk about the importance of education and environment in human development. What can we do to foster people’s innate abilities through education and society?

There are several things we can do to nurture people’s innate abilities through education and society. The first is to respect developmental rhythms. At each age, the brain can acquire certain knowledge and not others. It’s hard to say exactly when specific things happen because each person matures at their own pace. But, for example, you can’t expect a child to learn to read at age three—some might, but they are the exception. The right age, in terms of brain development, is between five and seven. If we adapt to a child’s developmental rhythm, not only will they learn better, but they’ll also enjoy it more. So the first element is respecting these developmental stages.

Second, we must always build bonds of trust with the people around us and with our students. We learn from those we trust, and we avoid those who make us feel insecure. If we trust them, they will trust us—and everything we explain to them will have a greater impact.

And lastly (though there are many more, but I’ll keep it brief), the third element is letting them do what they’re capable of doing on their own—in other words, not overprotecting them. We should maintain a strong emotional connection, as I mentioned before, but without overprotection. Everything they can do for themselves, they should do for themselves. That’s how they build their own identity in an empowered way, how they learn to face life’s difficulties (and there will be many), and how they become resilient. I believe these three elements—and certainly others—can significantly enhance the innate potential of every human being.

What role does science play in our development as human beings, both individually and as a species? What role does AI play in this human development?

Science, like the other arts, plays a fundamental role. It’s a creative aspect of the human species that requires abstraction. Scientific theories need abstract thinking; developing new tools or processes requires us to extrapolate from what we know and project it toward ideas that aren’t tangible when we first conceive them. This also requires flexibility: to adapt to change or to plan for different scenarios in the same situation.

What role does artificial intelligence play in this development? Well, AI is a result of human scientific advancement. It was born from the progress we’ve made, and it is a powerful tool that I believe we can use effectively. The problem arises when it’s misused—when we talk about non-adaptive AI. It’s not meant to solve our problems, doubts, or do the work for us. It’s a tool that gives us information so that we can use it critically and thoughtfully—filtering it according to our needs, the context, expanding it, completing it, and discarding what isn’t accurate, because there’s always something that isn’t.

Is creativity necessary for doing science?

Absolutely. Creativity builds on the knowledge we already have and allows us to combine it in new ways to make progress, to propose new methods for doing anything. All arts require creativity to move forward. But creativity feeds on what we already know, to recombine it in a different way. We can’t be creative if we know nothing. We need to learn—but we must do so dynamically and flexibly, precisely to foster creativity.

On the balance between biology and culture: how do these two factors interact in shaping who we are and how we evolve as a society?

Biology and culture are constantly interrelated and ultimately define who we are. Biology plays a role, and so does culture. This connects to what we discussed earlier about genetics and neuroscience. I said: our genetics give us certain conditions, but it is the environment we encounter—educational, social, cultural—that allows us to either express the potential within us or to hide it, suppress it, or even mutilate it. These two factors influence who we are and, consequently, how we develop as a society.

We live in a time of great scientific and technological progress, but also of widespread misinformation. How can we foster a more critical society with a stronger scientific culture?

To foster a more critical society with a stronger scientific culture—but also with more humanistic and artistic culture—I believe we should all have a minimum cultural foundation in these three areas. This should be developed throughout childhood, adolescence, and youth… during the entire learning stage. In fact, we are learning throughout our entire lives. It’s about creating spaces where we can reflect on what we are learning, on what we are doing. We live in an accelerated society that doesn’t allow for reflection because we don’t have time—and reflecting is a mental activity that consumes a lot of energy. And if we don’t have time, we devote our metabolic energy to other things. That’s why, both in education and perhaps in adult life, we need to seek moments of stimulation, but also moments of calm and pause, to think about what we are learning, what we are doing, how we might change it, about the information we receive… so we can learn from a critical and reflective perspective to better distinguish between what is true and what is false, between information and misinformation.

El arte de ser humanos was the first popular science essay to win the Josep Pla Prize. Would you say this recognition could be a turning point that opens more space for science in Catalan literature?

Certainly, one of the things that thrilled me most about winning the Josep Pla Prize is that it’s the first time a scientific essay has received this award. For me, it’s a very important recognition of the crucial role that dissemination and essay writing play in our culture. In this case, a scientific essay. But essays in philosophy, humanities, history, economics… are equally valuable and necessary for society. I hope this marks a turning point to open up all these fields of knowledge to society and, in particular, to the Catalan literary scene.