Poll: Is Biology A Science?
- Thread starter similar.squirrel
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Pointless? Really?Sensenmann said:
Can you clarify what you mean by pointless?
Pretty much all the cereal plants we eat have been improved by plant science. Plants are pretty much the method in which the majority of energy enters an ecosystem. And there's going to be a food crisis at some point in the near future unless we really improve the efficiency of our crops.
And on what basis is in the simplest? Have you seen the amount of stuff that occurs in a cell? The complexity is staggering. Literally millions of molecules all flowing around with amazing precision, enzymes perfectly involved to allow reactions to occur that would never occur, or at the very least unimaginably slowly outside of a cell, all of these linking to form huge metabolic processes. And that's just for one cell, all these cells interact with each other, sending signalling molecules constantly up and down regulating each other's activity. What about the senses, how a single photon of light is changed into an electrical impulse which in turn is then some how understood.
Your claim of simple I feel just shows your ignorance of the subject. I am not saying any science is more important then any other. Just biology is anything but simple and plants about as far as way from "pointless" as you can get.
I feel that she's putting words in the comics' mouth and erroneously misinformed.thaluikhain said:
Therefore, Biology is a science.
Yes. If you want to boils everything down to "true" science then physics isn't a science since its a mathematical study of the relation of particles and math isn't a science since its just study and theorizing on relationships of systems. On top of that, mathematics is subject to human understanding and interpretation. How we perceive it is not necessary how it is so math is. It is actually a topic of study for sociology, how we as humans created a system to perceive math. Sociology in turn derives down to psychology to biology to physics to math to sociology and so on in an infinite loop. There is no beginning or "true" science there is only axiomatic starting points. (We have to start here so we can build up since you have to choose some place to start and build from or you're stuck).
Purists piss me off since they lob these comments to try and discredit other groups (A social anthropological process ironically) without stopping to consider why we have sciences. We have different categories to specify specialized knowledge that goes beyond the general knowledge of other categories. Physics is not a be all end all because we can build something from there and that is another science. Physics in itself explains the process that other things build on. Saying that its the truth because its the lowest is again asinine since it can also be reduce to core elements that boil down to not even a science but a collection of points of data and axioms. Ah this whole thing is a stupid display of power and trying to internally legitimatize one's own position though attacking and deconstructing others. THe psychology of it all is just so stupid.
Purists piss me off since they lob these comments to try and discredit other groups (A social anthropological process ironically) without stopping to consider why we have sciences. We have different categories to specify specialized knowledge that goes beyond the general knowledge of other categories. Physics is not a be all end all because we can build something from there and that is another science. Physics in itself explains the process that other things build on. Saying that its the truth because its the lowest is again asinine since it can also be reduce to core elements that boil down to not even a science but a collection of points of data and axioms. Ah this whole thing is a stupid display of power and trying to internally legitimatize one's own position though attacking and deconstructing others. THe psychology of it all is just so stupid.
Lets look at the etymology of the word "science" shall we? Science is derived originally from scientia in latin (which is actually a conjugation of scire) which means to know or to learn. So basically the moment you are achieving new knowledge, you are technically doing a "science".
Also note that science is synonymous with words like art, technique, method, or discipline. When you think about it, linguistically there is very little in difference in between art and science (and i know like EVERYONE is going to come down on me like a tone of bricks by saying that). By which i mean how many times has someone referred to a science as an art? Or an art as a science? And no one can say that they havnt heard someone say "i study the art of learning the secrets of the universe" or something like that.
Really when you get down to it "science" and "art" are allot like "Jargon" and "slang". Seemingly two very different concepts but actually the difference being only a hair of difference. The only reason that we think instinctively that science involves a guy in a white coat is the fact that society (or in this case XKCD)has displayed that stereotype upon us.
Basically what im saying is im willing to say that not only is Biology a science, but so is going to a life drawing class for fun at uni or something of the sort.
Btw i am more than aware it took me 4 fucking paragraphs to say that :/
Also note that science is synonymous with words like art, technique, method, or discipline. When you think about it, linguistically there is very little in difference in between art and science (and i know like EVERYONE is going to come down on me like a tone of bricks by saying that). By which i mean how many times has someone referred to a science as an art? Or an art as a science? And no one can say that they havnt heard someone say "i study the art of learning the secrets of the universe" or something like that.
Really when you get down to it "science" and "art" are allot like "Jargon" and "slang". Seemingly two very different concepts but actually the difference being only a hair of difference. The only reason that we think instinctively that science involves a guy in a white coat is the fact that society (or in this case XKCD)has displayed that stereotype upon us.
Basically what im saying is im willing to say that not only is Biology a science, but so is going to a life drawing class for fun at uni or something of the sort.
Btw i am more than aware it took me 4 fucking paragraphs to say that :/
..Uhm, weird question much?
Of course Biology is a science. Anyone thinking otherwise obviously doesn't understand what science is, or how it works.
Edit: Also, sadly, this is the first time I have ever seen those two words in a question questioning the relationship between one another. Huh.
Of course Biology is a science. Anyone thinking otherwise obviously doesn't understand what science is, or how it works.
Edit: Also, sadly, this is the first time I have ever seen those two words in a question questioning the relationship between one another. Huh.
Dude what's your paper on? I'm a biochem undergraduate at the moment so I do come across the occasional chemistry literature.thiosk said:But is she a scientist, or a science advocate?similar.squirrel said:
I know a lot about quarks and their flavors as well, but I'm not a physicist, I'm a chemist, and as of next week I'll be published in Science [http://www.sciencemag.org]. I am absolutely a scientist, regardless of what XKCD has to say about the purity of chemistry.
Even archeology is a science. Biology is certainly a science, a life science as opposed to a physical science, but a science nonetheless.
Philosophy of Science View:
The essence of modern science is research. This is constituted by three factors:
1) The presence of a ground plan (i.e. subscribing to a model of an objective world, subject to the same laws discovered in other disciplines).
2) Methodology (The scientific method, and use of necessary instruments/technology to experiment in a structured way which is bound by rigor/exactitude).
3) Institutionalization (Where activity is on-going, and naturally continues to specialize itself further and further into different departments - usually at a university or such).
Biology follows all of these criteria, and is thus a science.
The human sciences like psychology, sociology, etc, derive their exactness from their inexactness, ironically - because in a human science where so much is simply unquantifiable, you are less likely to be exact the more you dissect and quantify. But they are still sciences, given that.
The essence of modern science is research. This is constituted by three factors:
1) The presence of a ground plan (i.e. subscribing to a model of an objective world, subject to the same laws discovered in other disciplines).
2) Methodology (The scientific method, and use of necessary instruments/technology to experiment in a structured way which is bound by rigor/exactitude).
3) Institutionalization (Where activity is on-going, and naturally continues to specialize itself further and further into different departments - usually at a university or such).
Biology follows all of these criteria, and is thus a science.
The human sciences like psychology, sociology, etc, derive their exactness from their inexactness, ironically - because in a human science where so much is simply unquantifiable, you are less likely to be exact the more you dissect and quantify. But they are still sciences, given that.
Ahhh, that XKCD strip. Still makes me laugh when I think about it; I was almost unable to function on the day it was first written. It was slightly unfortunate that I'm a biologist and my dad's a mathematition though, lots of teasing when he found it.
I can sort of see what your girlfriend's saying. Lemme put this in context: I'm studying microbiology an University, which is a highly chemical based part of biology. Some aspects really are little more than chemical reactions that happen to take place inside cells almost by coincidence, other courses acknowledge that these processes play a small part in keeping a bigger organism alive.
However macrobiology, stuff such as surgery, may blur the line (I really hope my friend doesn't read this and kick my ass before finishing it, he's training to be a surgeon). It moves away from traditional 'science' in labs and testtubes, also leaving little room for experimentation and error since when you try something new, you likely kill someone. However, it does follow the scientific method of observing a thing and seeing what happens when you change one part before attempting to explain that and, for surgery, fix it. It's just that seeing that someone's liver has fallen off and needs a few stitches doesn't need a microscope, which makes some people believe it isn't a science.
I can sort of see what your girlfriend's saying. Lemme put this in context: I'm studying microbiology an University, which is a highly chemical based part of biology. Some aspects really are little more than chemical reactions that happen to take place inside cells almost by coincidence, other courses acknowledge that these processes play a small part in keeping a bigger organism alive.
However macrobiology, stuff such as surgery, may blur the line (I really hope my friend doesn't read this and kick my ass before finishing it, he's training to be a surgeon). It moves away from traditional 'science' in labs and testtubes, also leaving little room for experimentation and error since when you try something new, you likely kill someone. However, it does follow the scientific method of observing a thing and seeing what happens when you change one part before attempting to explain that and, for surgery, fix it. It's just that seeing that someone's liver has fallen off and needs a few stitches doesn't need a microscope, which makes some people believe it isn't a science.
I hope it is as i'm studying it for A level.
But my view is that i believe biology is a science. It might be a bit silly (and just glorified chemistry/physics) but i still believe that you can study anything really.
Science comes from latin "scienta" meaning knowledge (thanks Google)(also said before). So technically anything could be a "science" so to speak (within reason).
But isn't biology like the study of life?
If so then yes it is a science. But maths and physics are the "pure" sciences, definatly.
(Also thank god the the anonymity of the internet, while my chemistry teachers make jokes about biology. My biology teachers would have my head for saying its glorified chemistry)
But my view is that i believe biology is a science. It might be a bit silly (and just glorified chemistry/physics) but i still believe that you can study anything really.
Science comes from latin "scienta" meaning knowledge (thanks Google)(also said before). So technically anything could be a "science" so to speak (within reason).
But isn't biology like the study of life?
If so then yes it is a science. But maths and physics are the "pure" sciences, definatly.
(Also thank god the the anonymity of the internet, while my chemistry teachers make jokes about biology. My biology teachers would have my head for saying its glorified chemistry)
I figured it was either a physics major or a Creationist who wrote the topic, and while I'm glad to see it is the former, I have a much more colorful answer if it were the latter and one that doesn't involve any religion bashing.
But ok it's the former. Your girlfriends opinion if flat out measureably incorrect. By the agreed upon definition of the scientific method, ecology and general biology qualify by collecting data through repeatable measurement in an attempt to disprove the null hypothesis. That's what biologists do.
Now it's not an exact science which may be more philosophically distasteful to your girlfriend who prefers the abstraction of mathematical precision, but exact sciences are not the only science.
But ok it's the former. Your girlfriends opinion if flat out measureably incorrect. By the agreed upon definition of the scientific method, ecology and general biology qualify by collecting data through repeatable measurement in an attempt to disprove the null hypothesis. That's what biologists do.
Now it's not an exact science which may be more philosophically distasteful to your girlfriend who prefers the abstraction of mathematical precision, but exact sciences are not the only science.
Art? Why is biology art? Is knowing and observing division of cells an expression of inner feelings? Is any of it an expression of individuals through their works, would fish breathe with lungs if a certain biologist thought it'd be fun to say that it does?!
If anything, genetics might be the one aspect of biology it that comes close (and in the future perhaps it will be) art, when the science will serve only as a tool for expressing yourself.
I mean besides the lab coats, the systematics and logical conclusion along with scientific and organised observations of nature, of living organisms...well let me repeat this:
If anything, genetics might be the one aspect of biology it that comes close (and in the future perhaps it will be) art, when the science will serve only as a tool for expressing yourself.
I mean besides the lab coats, the systematics and logical conclusion along with scientific and organised observations of nature, of living organisms...well let me repeat this:
TWRule said:
