Poll: Is Biology A Science?

[captaincabbage]

Of course it's a bloody sciense! That's completely mental, to think it's anything other than science.
I really don't mean to be rude, but your girlfriend is being stupid if she thinks it's not sciense.

 

[Zechnophobe]

Discaimer: I think it is.

Anyway. My girlfriend takes the XKCD stance, whereby she claims that mathematics and physics are the only 'true' sciences, and that all aspects of biology are more akin to an art. Strangely, she seems to think that genetics is exempt, but things like ecology and taxonomy definitely do not fall within the realm of science.
She thinks the same applies to psychology and sociology, though I'd be inclined to agree sometimes, given that those subjects don't deal with phenomena that are immediately or easily quantifiable.

I agree insofar as all biology has a chemical basis, and all chemistry has a physical basis, but still. The systematic study of any phenomena, to me, is a science. We could study anatomy in terms of physics [biophysics dabbles with this], but it seems inherently ridiculous to discredit an entire branch of science because it uses a different set of vocabulary.

Thoughts?


EDIT: Be civilized. I don't appreciate anybody being called an idiot, much less somebody I'm close to. I was asking for an opinion regards this specific question, not my choice of partner.

I think she is a bit confused. Mathematics, for instance, isn't a science. It is a construct that helps us to quantify the world. Science is a philosophy for studying things, not a structure for measuring them.

You USE math to come up with the solution to something. When you make a hypothesis in science, you use MATH to check if it works out, by measuring the actual result.


As for is biology not a science? Well, I guess what is really meant is 'Can we study biology scientifically?' and the answer is of course yes. You can, and people often do. It is how we know so many things .

(Captcha: pages typedin ... that's actually an almost grammatically correct phrase!)

 

[Digital_Hero]

I apologize, because I did read your disclaimer, but I do believe your girlfriend is thinking something quite silly.

I think this mostly because she thinks genetics "are exempt" which is quite wrong

What about the study of viruses? They ARE biological in nature, and people do perform scientific acts with them. Granted they are genetic experiments, but still experiments done by scientists nonetheless.

I think i've lost my point somewhere in all of that, but I do believe she is wrong in her statement.

 

[008Zulu_v1legacy]

Biology is what you do when dont have the maths for real science. (a free cookie to whoever names the quoter).

Without Biology we wouldn't have disease resistant crops and alot of people would have died from simple infections if Penecillin werent discovered.

 

[constantcompile]

Anyway. My girlfriend takes the XKCD stance, whereby she claims that mathematics and physics are the only 'true' sciences, and that all aspects of biology are more akin to an art. Strangely, she seems to think that genetics is exempt, but things like ecology and taxonomy definitely do not fall within the realm of science.

Disclaimer: I can - sort of - see where she's coming from. At the same time, I think she's wrong.

The scientific method is very nearly the "truest" definition of science I can think of. You control all inputs in an experiment, you change a single factor, you watch what happens. No matter what subject you use the scientific method in, if you use it, you are performing science.

What do mathematics, physics, and genetics have in common? You can control all of the inputs, without question. When you can't control the inputs, you're basically playing a numbers game; hoping that the change in a single variable, even if the others aren't controlled, will be significant enough to produce a statistically significant result.

Statistics is very messy. I completely understand how purists would be inclined to be skeptical of any statistical evidence. That said, it's pretty much all we've got right now. To ignore or discredit the "soft sciences" - sciences that rely on statistical and circumstantial evidence to show relationships and test hypotheses - because the inputs cannot be controlled with certainty is to completely ignore how the world works when it isn't on paper; it is a huge disservice to oneself and society.

Do I think that Biology is literally a science? No. Do I think that it should be regarded, treated, and called a science? Yes. Words are words. After studying Biology, I've gotten a better sense of how meaningless the legal terms and verbiage we use actually are in reality. Words are means to an end, and given how broken and messy our language is, I think discrediting a subject due to a verbal technicality would be extraordinarily stupid.

(To be clear, I don't think you are discrediting Biology by asking this question.)

 

[crudus]

It has laws, theories, and researchers using the scientific method. How does that not make it a science?

The way I see it - if you get to wear a lab coat, you're doing science.

Spoiler: teehee

 

[frago roc]

Anyone who thinks that biology is not a science simply does not know what science is. I won't go as far as calling them "idiots," but their lack of insight into my degree major is troubling. They just see biology as hard facts they have to memorize, but biology is much much more than what you receive in high school. Science is about discovery, and to be honest I never heard anyone refer to math as a science - there is no scientific method, therefore no science. Pz out.

 

[Harveypot]

I thought it was just a fact cos biology is taught in science or by science teachers in most schools i know of so um... yeah.

 

[Shycte]

Give her a dictionary, so she may look up the word and then go back to the kitchen. Damn women. We gave them the right to vote and this how they repay us? Madness!

[small]I may or may not be joking[/small]

 

[Tarlane]

Ahh, biology. The only science where division and multiplication are the same thing.

 

[Uszi]

Ahh, biology. The only science where division and multiplication are the same thing.

I didn't get it at first...
Then I got it!

 

[Grand_Arcana]

Your GF is dead wrong. What's most amazing is that she considers Genetics a Science, but not Taxonomy, also known as Phylogenetics. Taxonomy is constructed using Genetics!

 

[Grand_Arcana]

Ahh, biology. The only science where division and multiplication are the same thing.

Um. . .

9/4 = 9*.25

 

[Uszi]

I know you asked us to be civil, but your GF is a moron. What's incredibly moronic is that she considers Genetics a Science, but not Taxonomy, also known as Phylogenetics. Taxonomy is constructed using Genetics!

Someone who espouses a "moronic" line of thought =/= a moron.

She might be a highly intelligent but misinformed or under informed individual, for instance.

 

[Grand_Arcana]

I know you asked us to be civil, but your GF is a moron. What's incredibly moronic is that she considers Genetics a Science, but not Taxonomy, also known as Phylogenetics. Taxonomy is constructed using Genetics!

Someone who espouses a "moronic" line of thought =/= a moron.

She might be a highly intelligent but misinformed or under informed individual, for instance.

Ah, sorry, I've just wanted to play with the word "moron" lately. . .

 

[GeorgW]

We have this discussion all the time in school. Half the class is on one side, and half is on the other. I'm on the side that it is not. I feel that a series of observations and guesses based upon them is not science. I'm of course not talking about all of biology as a field, but more about things like ecology and ethology. Biology is science, ecology is not, just making that clear. For exaples, once it was said that all ravens are black. Then one day, a white one was seen, so they corrected it. This is not a scientific method, that is guesswork. Maybe I'm just being ridiculous, but that's the way I feel.

 

[Uszi]

We have this discussion all the time in school. Half the class is on one side, and half is on the other. I'm on the side that it is not. I feel that a series of observations and guesses based upon them is not science. I'm of course not talking about all of biology as a field, but more about things like ecology and ethology. Biology is science, ecology is not, just making that clear. For exaples, once it was said that all ravens are black. Then one day, a white one was seen, so they corrected it. This is not a scientific method, that is guesswork. Maybe I'm just being ridiculous, but that's the way I feel.

So what about ecology is just making observations and guesses?

Ecology also produces testable hypotheses, and then runs experiments. Your example demonstrates a poor understanding of the kinds of questions ecologists are really tackling. No offense to you of course, I'm just saying: ecologists do more than look for white ravens.

Probably my favorite part of learning ecology was animal behavior, and in specific studying questions of nature vs nurture. The initial questioning of "Is nature or nuture more predominant" sounds very heady and philosophical, but it's been studying in extremely interesting ways by making hypothesis about things like the development of songs in song birds, and then running tests on those birds (i.e. depriving them of model songs as they are learning, brain lessioning, etc). People are then able to apply what they learn about animal behavior in nature, and make some predictions about human behavior, instincts, etc. Which is pretty useful stuff, I think.

And these experiments done in animal behavior and learning fall within the subset of ecology.

Ecological studies of the affects of humans on coral reefs or the rain forest also are scientific as well. My TA in my ecology class was studying strategies for reef regeneration, i.e. examining which sorts of substrates coral larvae prefer to settle and grow on, and specifically how sponges aid in the growth of coral reefs through a form of symbiosis.

This is all studied by making observations in the field, forming testable hypothesis, and then returning to the field to test those hypothesis.

How is that not science?

I know you asked us to be civil, but your GF is a moron. What's incredibly moronic is that she considers Genetics a Science, but not Taxonomy, also known as Phylogenetics. Taxonomy is constructed using Genetics!

Someone who espouses a "moronic" line of thought =/= a moron.

She might be a highly intelligent but misinformed or under informed individual, for instance.

Ah, sorry, I've just wanted to play with the word "moron" lately. . .

 

[SulfuricDonut]

It is a science, however XKCD is correct in saying that it's just applied Chemistry... etc.
I don't particularly enjoy Biology, however I admit that it is an extremely useful field in a practical sense.

 

[Uszi]

It is a science, however XKCD is correct in saying that it's just applied Chemistry... etc.
I don't particularly enjoy Biology, however I admit that it is an extremely useful field in a practical sense.

Right, XKCD's commentary was on supposed "purity." I posted the comic earlier in the thread, but essentially the purist science is Mathematics because every other science applies mathematics in its employ.

 

[Sion_Barzahd]

personally i'm more curious as to how you can define biology as an art.

But yeah, biology is a science, so is chemistry for that matter. Hell most psychology is science too, and this is the most that doesn't include freud's psychobabble.