Revision as of 22:11, 13 June 2011 view sourceDanielkueh (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users8,755 editsm →Philosophy of science: deleted unnecessary article← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:22, 12 December 2024 view source Zzzs (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users6,377 edits →Middle Ages: typo per edit requestTags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile editNext edit → | ||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Short description|Systematic endeavour to gain knowledge}} | |||
{{About|the general term, particularly as it refers to experimental sciences|the specific topics of study by scientists|Natural science}} | |||
{{For-multi|the journal|Science (journal){{!}}''Science'' (journal)|a topical guide|Outline of science|other uses}} | |||
{{Other uses}} | |||
{{pp-semi- |
{{pp-semi-indef}} | ||
{{ |
{{pp-move}} | ||
{{Use British English|date=December 2024}} | |||
] | |||
{{Use dmy dates|date=December 2024}} | |||
{{Science}} | |||
{{CS1 config|mode=cs1}} | |||
'''Science''' (from {{lang-la|scientia}} meaning "knowledge") is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes ] in the form of testable ] and ] about the ].<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/science |quote= knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific method '''. . .''' such knowledge or such a system of knowledge concerned with the physical world and its phenomena |publisher=Merriam-Webster |title=Online dictionary |accessdate=2009-05-22}}</ref><ref name="Popper">{{Cite book|last=Popper |first=Karl |authorlink=Karl Popper |title=The Logic of Scientific Discovery |origyear=1959 |edition=2nd English |year=2002 |publisher=Routledge Classics |location=New York, NY |isbn=0-415-27844-9 |oclc=59377149 |page=3}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book| last = Wilson | first = Edward | title = Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge | publisher = Vintage | location = New York | year = 1999 | isbn = 0-679-76867-X }}</ref><ref>] (1935), reminds us that before a specific fact 'existed', it had to be created as part of a social agreement within a community.</ref> An older and closely related meaning still in use today is that of ], for whom scientific knowledge was a body of reliable knowledge that can be logically and ] explained (''see ] below'').<ref>], ca. 4th century BCE {{cite web | title = ] Book VI, and ] Book I: | url = http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0054%3Abekker%20page%3D1139b}} "In general the sign of knowledge or ignorance is the ability to teach, and for this reason we hold that art rather than experience is scientific knowledge (''epistemē''); ''for the artists can teach, but the others cannot''." — </ref> | |||
{{Science|expanded=all}} | |||
'''Science''' is a ] discipline that builds and organises ] in the form of testable ] and ]s about the universe.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Wilson |first=E. O. |url=https://archive.org/details/consilienceunity00wils_135 |title=Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge |publisher=Vintage |year=1999 |isbn=978-0-679-76867-8 |edition=Reprint |location=New York |pages=–71 |chapter=The natural sciences |url-access=limited}}</ref><ref name="Heilbron2003">{{cite book |last=Heilbron |first=J. L. |author-link=J. L. Heilbron |title=The Oxford Companion to the History of Modern Science |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=2003 |isbn=978-0-19-511229-0 |location=New York |pages=vii–x |chapter=Preface |quote=...modern science is a discovery as well as an invention. It was a discovery that nature generally acts regularly enough to be described by laws and even by mathematics; and required invention to devise the techniques, abstractions, apparatus, and organization for exhibiting the regularities and securing their law-like descriptions. |display-authors=etal}}</ref> Modern science is typically divided into two or three major branches:<ref name="Cohen2021">{{cite book |last=Cohen |first=Eliel |url=https://www.routledge.com/The-University-and-its-Boundaries-Thriving-or-Surviving-in-the-21st-Century/Cohen/p/book/9780367562984 |title=The University and its Boundaries: Thriving or Surviving in the 21st Century |publisher=Routledge |year=2021 |isbn=978-0-367-56298-4 |location=New York |pages=14–41 |chapter=The boundary lens: theorising academic activity |access-date=4 May 2021 }}</ref> the ]s (e.g., ], ], and ]), which study the ]; and the ] (e.g., ], ], and ]), which study ]s and societies.<ref name="Colander2019">{{cite book |last1=Colander |first1=David C. |title=Social Science: An Introduction to the Study of Society |last2=Hunt |first2=Elgin F. |year=2019 |publisher=Routledge |edition=17th |location=New York |pages=1–22 |chapter=Social science and its methods}}</ref><ref name="Nisbet2020">{{cite encyclopedia |title=Social Science |encyclopedia=Encyclopædia Britannica |url=https://www.britannica.com/topic/social-science |access-date=9 May 2021 |date=16 October 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220202193947/https://www.britannica.com/topic/social-science |archive-date=2 February 2022 |last2=Greenfeld |first2=Liah |last1=Nisbet |first1=Robert A. |url-status=live}}</ref> The ]s (e.g., ], mathematics, and ]), which study ]s governed by ]s and rules,<ref name="Löwe2002">{{cite journal |last=Löwe |first=Benedikt |author-link=Benedikt Löwe |year=2002 |title=The formal sciences: their scope, their foundations, and their unity |journal=Synthese |volume=133 |issue=1/2 |pages=5–11 |doi=10.1023/A:1020887832028 |issn=0039-7857 |s2cid=9272212}}</ref><ref name="Rucker2019">{{cite book |last=Rucker |first=Rudy |author-link=Rudy Rucker |url=http://www.rudyrucker.com/infinityandthemind/#calibre_link-328 |title=Infinity and the Mind: The Science and Philosophy of the Infinite |publisher=Princeton University Press |year=2019 |isbn=978-0-691-19138-6 |edition=Reprint |pages=157–188 |chapter=Robots and souls |access-date=11 May 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210226212447/http://www.rudyrucker.com/infinityandthemind/#calibre_link-328 |archive-date=26 February 2021 |url-status=live}}</ref> are sometimes described as being sciences as well; however, they are often regarded as a separate field because they rely on ] instead of the ] or ] as their main methodology.<ref name="Fetzer2013">{{cite book |last1=Fetzer |first1=James H. |title=Computers and Cognition: Why Minds are not Machines |publisher=Kluwer |year=2013 |isbn=978-1-4438-1946-6 |location=Newcastle, United Kingdom |pages=271–308 |chapter=Computer reliability and public policy: Limits of knowledge of computer-based systems}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Nickles |first1=Thomas |title=Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problem |publisher=The University of Chicago Press |year=2013 |page=104 |chapter=The Problem of Demarcation}}</ref> ]s are disciplines that use scientific knowledge for practical purposes, such as ] and ].<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Fischer |first1=M. R. |last2=Fabry |first2=G |year=2014 |title=Thinking and acting scientifically: Indispensable basis of medical education |journal=GMS Zeitschrift für Medizinische Ausbildung |volume=31 |issue=2 |pages=Doc24 |doi=10.3205/zma000916 |pmc=4027809 |pmid=24872859}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Sinclair |first=Marius |year=1993 |title=On the Differences between the Engineering and Scientific Methods |url=https://www.ijee.ie/contents/c090593.html |url-status=live |journal=The International Journal of Engineering Education |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171115220102/https://www.ijee.ie/contents/c090593.html |archive-date=15 November 2017 |access-date=7 September 2018}}</ref><ref name="Bunge1966">{{Cite book |last=Bunge |first=M. |title=Contributions to a Philosophy of Technology |publisher=Springer |year=1966 |isbn=978-94-010-2184-5 |editor-last=Rapp |editor-first=F. |location=Dordrecht |pages=19–39 |chapter=Technology as Applied Science |doi=10.1007/978-94-010-2182-1_2 |s2cid=110332727}}</ref> | |||
Since ] science as a type of knowledge was closely linked to ]. In the ] the two words, "science" and "philosophy", were sometimes used interchangeably in the ]. By the 17th century, "natural philosophy" (which is today called "]") had begun to be considered separately from "philosophy" in general.<ref>Consider, for example, ] (1687) '']''</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Newton's Philosophy |author=Andrew Janiak |url=http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/newton-philosophy/ |publisher=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |quote=Fully understanding Newton means avoiding anachronistically substituting our conception of philosophy in the twenty-first century for what the early moderns called 'natural philosophy'. To be sure, the latter includes much that we now call 'science', and yet it clearly includes much else besides...Newton may have provided physics with its paradigm...Newton's scientific achievement was in part to have vanquished both Cartesian and Leibnizian physics; in the eighteenth century, and indeed much of the nineteenth, physics was largely a Newtonian enterprise. |date=13 October 2006 |accessdate=19 March 2011}}</ref> However, "science" continued to be used in a broad sense denoting reliable knowledge about a topic, in the same way it is still used in modern terms such as ] or ]. | |||
The ] spans the majority of the historical record, with the earliest identifiable predecessors to modern science dating to the ] in ] and ] ({{circa|3000–1200 BCE}}). Their contributions to mathematics, ], and medicine entered and shaped the Greek ] of ], whereby formal attempts were made to provide explanations of events in the ] based on natural causes, while further advancements, including the introduction of the ], were made during the ].<ref name="Lindberg2007">{{Cite book |last=Lindberg |first=David C. |title=The beginnings of Western science: the European Scientific tradition in philosophical, religious, and institutional context |publisher=University of Chicago Press |year=2007 |isbn=978-0226482057 |edition=2nd}}</ref>{{rp|p=12}}<ref name="Grant2007">{{cite book |last=Grant |first=Edward |title=A History of Natural Philosophy: From the Ancient World to the Nineteenth Century |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=2007 |isbn=978-0-521-68957-1 |location=New York |pages=1–26 |chapter=Ancient Egypt to Plato |chapter-url=https://archive.org/details/historynaturalph00gran/page/n16 |chapter-url-access=limited}}</ref><ref> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230418081025/https://books.google.com/books?id=rMAaBgAAQBAJ |date=18 April 2023 }}, p. 125, Robert Crane, Springer, 2014</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last=Keay |first=John |url=https://archive.org/details/indiahistory00keay/page/132 |title=India: A history |publisher=Atlantic Monthly Press |year=2000 |isbn=978-0-87113-800-2 |page= |quote=The great era of all that is deemed classical in Indian literature, art and science was now dawning. It was this crescendo of creativity and scholarship, as much as ... political achievements of the Guptas, which would make their age so golden. |author-link=John Keay}}</ref> Scientific research deteriorated in these regions after the ] during the ] (400–1000 CE), but in the ] (], ] and the ]) scholarship flourished again. Some Greek manuscripts lost in Western Europe were preserved and expanded upon in the Middle East during the ],<ref>{{cite book |last=Lindberg |first=David C. |title=The beginnings of Western science: the European Scientific tradition in philosophical, religious, and institutional context |publisher=University of Chicago Press |year=2007 |isbn=978-0-226-48205-7 |edition=2nd |pages=163–192 |chapter=Islamic science}}</ref> along with the later efforts of ] who brought Greek manuscripts from the dying ] to Western Europe at the start of the ]. | |||
In modern use, science is "often treated as synonymous with ‘natural and physical science’, and thus restricted to those branches of study that relate to the phenomena of the material universe and their laws, sometimes with implied exclusion of pure mathematics. This is now the dominant sense in ordinary use."<ref>Oxford English Dictionary</ref> This narrower sense of "science" developed as a part of science became a distinct enterprise of defining "]", based on early examples such as ]'s laws, ]'s laws, and ]'s ]. In this period it became more common to refer to natural philosophy as "natural science". Over the course of the 19th century, the word "science" became increasingly associated with the disciplined study of the natural world including ], ], ] and ]. This sometimes left the study of human thought and society in a linguistic limbo, which was resolved by classifying these areas of academic study as ]. Similarly, several other major areas of disciplined study and knowledge exist today under the general rubric of "science", such as ] and ].<ref>] (1949, 1965) points out that all knowledge, including natural or social science, is also subjective. Page 162: "Thus it dawned upon me that fundamentally everything is subjective, everything without exception. That was a shock." See: ].</ref> | |||
The recovery and assimilation of ] and ] into Western Europe from the 10th to 13th centuries revived ],<ref>{{cite book |last=Lindberg |first=David C. |title=The beginnings of Western science: the European Scientific tradition in philosophical, religious, and institutional context |publisher=University of Chicago Press |year=2007 |isbn=978-0-226-48205-7 |edition=2nd |pages=193–224 |chapter=The revival of learning in the West}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Lindberg |first=David C. |title=The beginnings of Western science: the European Scientific tradition in philosophical, religious, and institutional context |publisher=University of Chicago Press |year=2007 |isbn=978-0-226-48205-7 |edition=2nd |pages=225–253 |chapter=The recovery and assimilation of Greek and Islamic science}}</ref><ref>Sease, Virginia; Schmidt-Brabant, Manfrid. Thinkers, Saints, Heretics: Spiritual Paths of the Middle Ages. 2007. . Retrieved 6 October 2023</ref> which was later transformed by the ] that began in the 16th century<ref>{{cite book |last=Principe |first=Lawrence M. |title=Scientific Revolution: A Very Short Introduction |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=2011 |isbn=978-0-19-956741-6 |location=New York |pages=1–3 |chapter=Introduction}}</ref> as new ideas and discoveries departed from previous Greek conceptions and traditions.<ref>{{cite book |last=Lindberg |first=David C. |title=The beginnings of Western science: the European Scientific tradition in philosophical, religious, and institutional context |publisher=University of Chicago Press |year=2007 |isbn=978-0-226-48205-7 |edition=2nd |pages=357–368 |chapter=The legacy of ancient and medieval science}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Grant |first=Edward |url=https://archive.org/details/historynaturalph00gran |title=A History of Natural Philosophy: From the Ancient World to the Nineteenth Century |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=2007 |isbn=978-0-521-68957-1 |location=New York |pages=–322 |chapter=Transformation of medieval natural philosophy from the early period modern period to the end of the nineteenth century |url-access=limited}}</ref> The ] soon played a greater role in knowledge creation and it was not until the ] that many of the ] and ] features of science began to take shape,<ref>{{cite book |title=From Natural Philosophy to the Sciences: Writing the History of Nineteenth-Century Science |year=2003 |publisher=University of Chicago Press |isbn=978-0-226-08928-7 |editor1-last=Cahan |editor1-first=David}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Lightman |first1=Bernard |title=Wrestling with Nature: From Omens to Science |year=2011 |publisher=University of Chicago Press |isbn=978-0-226-31783-0 |editor1-last=Shank |editor1-first=Michael |page=367 |chapter=13. Science and the Public |editor2-last=Numbers |editor2-first=Ronald |editor3-last=Harrison |editor3-first=Peter}}</ref> along with the changing of "natural philosophy" to "natural science".<ref>{{cite book |last1=Harrison |first1=Peter |title=The Territories of Science and Religion |year=2015 |publisher=University of Chicago Press |isbn=978-0-226-18451-7 |pages=164–165 |quote=The changing character of those engaged in scientific endeavors was matched by a new nomenclature for their endeavors. The most conspicuous marker of this change was the replacement of "natural philosophy" by "natural science". In 1800 few had spoken of the "natural sciences" but by 1880 this expression had overtaken the traditional label "natural philosophy". The persistence of "natural philosophy" in the twentieth century is owing largely to historical references to a past practice (see figure 11). As should now be apparent, this was not simply the substitution of one term by another, but involved the jettisoning of a range of personal qualities relating to the conduct of philosophy and the living of the philosophical life. |author-link1=Peter Harrison (historian)}}</ref> | |||
==History and etymology== | |||
{{Wiktionary}} | |||
{{Main|History of science|Scientific revolution}} | |||
] of "Science" in front of the ]]] | |||
While descriptions of disciplined ] investigations of the natural world exist from times at least as early as ] (for example, by ] and ]), and ]s have been employed since the ] (for example, by ] and ]), the dawn of modern science is generally traced back to the ] during what is known as the ] of the 16th and 17th centuries.<ref name="history">{{Cite book | |||
| last = Hunt | |||
| first = Shelby D. | |||
| title = | |||
| publisher = M.E. Sharpe | |||
| year = 2003 | |||
| page = 18 | |||
| isbn = 0765609320}} | |||
</ref> This period was marked by a new way of studying the natural world, by methodical experimentation aimed at defining "laws of nature" while avoiding concerns with metaphysical concerns such as Aristotle's ].<ref>. Washington State University</ref> | |||
New knowledge in science is advanced by research from scientists who are motivated by curiosity about the world and a desire to solve problems.<ref>{{cite book |last=MacRitchie |first=Finlay |url=https://www.routledge.com/Scientific-Research-as-a-Career/MacRitchie/p/book/9781439869659 |title=Scientific Research as a Career |publisher=Routledge |year=2011 |isbn=978-1-4398-6965-9 |location=New York |pages=1–6 |chapter=Introduction |access-date=5 May 2021}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Marder |first=Michael P. |url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/research-methods-for-science/1C04E5D747781B68C52A79EE86BF584B |title=Research Methods for Science |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=2011 |isbn=978-0-521-14584-8 |location=New York |pages=1–17 |chapter=Curiosity and research |access-date=5 May 2021}}</ref> Contemporary scientific research is highly collaborative and is usually done by teams in academic and ],<ref>{{cite book |last=de Ridder |first=Jeroen |url=https://www.routledge.com/What-is-Scientific-Knowledge-An-Introduction-to-Contemporary-Epistemology/McCain-Kampourakis/p/book/9781138570153 |title=What is Scientific Knowledge? An Introduction to Contemporary Epistemology of Science |publisher=Routledge |year=2020 |isbn=978-1-138-57016-0 |editor-last1=McCain |editor-first1=Kevin |location=New York |pages=3–17 |chapter=How many scientists does it take to have knowledge? |access-date=5 May 2021 |editor-last2=Kampourakis |editor-first2=Kostas}}</ref> government agencies,<ref>{{cite book |last=Lindberg |first=David C. |title=The beginnings of Western science: the European Scientific tradition in philosophical, religious, and institutional context |publisher=University of Chicago Press |year=2007 |isbn=978-0-226-48205-7 |edition=2nd |pages=163–192 |chapter=Islamic science}}</ref> and companies.<ref>{{cite book |last=Szycher |first=Michael |url=https://www.routledge.com/Commercialization-Secrets-for-Scientists-and-Engineers/Szycher/p/book/9781498730600 |title=Commercialization Secrets for Scientists and Engineers |publisher=Routledge |year=2016 |isbn=978-1-138-40741-1 |location=New York |pages=159–176 |chapter=Establishing your dream team |access-date=5 May 2021}}</ref> The practical impact of their work has led to the emergence of ] that seek to influence the scientific enterprise by prioritising the ] of commercial products, armaments, health care, public infrastructure, and ]. | |||
{{quote|Rapid accumulation of knowledge, which has characterized the development of science since the 17th century, had never occurred before that time. The new kind of scientific activity emerged only in a few countries of Western Europe, and it was restricted to that small area for about two hundred years. (Since the 19th century, scientific knowledge has been assimilated by the rest of the world).| Joseph Ben–David, 1971.<ref name="history"/>}} | |||
== Etymology == | |||
This modern science developed from an older and broader enterprise. The word "science" is from ], and in turn from ] {{lang|la|''scientia''}} which was one of several words for "knowledge" in that language.<ref>It is the nominal form of the verb {{lang|la|''scire''}}, "to know". The ] (PIE) root that yields ''scire'' is ''*skei-'', meaning to "cut, separate, or discern".</ref><ref>. See also details of the PIE root at .</ref> In philosophical contexts, ''scientia'' and "science" were used to translate the Greek word ''epistemē'', which had acquired a specific definition in Greek philosophy, especially ], as a type of reliable knowledge which is built up logically from strong premises, and can be communicated and taught. In contrast to modern science, Aristotle's influential emphasis was upon the "theoretical" steps of ] universal rules from raw data, and did not treat the gathering of experience and raw data as part of science itself.<ref>"... man knows a thing scientifically when he possesses a conviction arrived at in a certain way, and when the first principles on which that conviction rests are known to him with certainty—for unless he is more certain of his first principles than of the conclusion drawn from them he will only possess the knowledge in question accidentally." — Aristotle, ''Nicomachean Ethics'' '''6''' (H. Rackham, ed.) </ref> | |||
The word ''science'' has been used in ] since the 14th century in the sense of "the state of knowing". The word was borrowed from the ] as the suffix {{lang|xno|-cience}}, which was borrowed from the ] word {{lang|la|]}}, meaning "knowledge, awareness, understanding". It is a ] of the Latin {{lang|la|]}} meaning "knowing", and undisputedly derived from the Latin {{lang|la|]}}, the ] ''{{lang|la|]}}'', meaning "to know".<ref>{{cite dictionary |title=Science |encyclopedia=Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary |url=http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/science |access-date=16 October 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190901035713/https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/science |archive-date=1 September 2019 |url-status=live}}</ref> | |||
There are many hypotheses for ''science''{{'}}s ultimate word origin. According to ], Dutch linguist and ], {{lang|la|sciō}} may have its origin in the ] as {{lang|itc-x-proto|*skije-}} or {{lang|itc-x-proto|*skijo-}} meaning "to know", which may originate from ] as ''{{PIE|*skh<sub>1</sub>-ie}}, {{PIE|*skh<sub>1</sub>-io}}'', meaning "to incise". The '']'' proposed {{lang|la|sciō}} is a ] of {{lang|la|]}}, meaning "to not know, be unfamiliar with", which may derive from Proto-Indo-European ''{{PIE|]}}'' in Latin {{lang|la|]}}, or ''{{PIE|*skh<sub>2</sub>-}}'', from ''{{PIE|*sḱʰeh2(i)-}}'' meaning "to cut".<ref>{{Cite encyclopedia |year=2008 |title=sciō |encyclopedia=Etymological Dictionary of Latin and the other Italic Languages |url=https://archive.org/details/m-de-vaan-2008-etymological-dictionary-of-latin-and-the-other-italic-languages/page/544/ |last=Vaan |first=Michiel de |author-link=Michiel de Vaan |series=] |pages=545 |isbn=978-90-04-16797-1}}</ref><!-- I honestly do not understand some of the last sentences in the source --> | |||
From the ] to the ], science or ''scientia'' continued to be used in this broad sense, which was still common until the 20th century.<ref name="MacMorris 1989 31–33">{{Cite book| first=Neville | last=MacMorris | year=1989 | title=The Natures of Science | pages=31–33 | publisher=Fairleigh Dickinson University Press | location=New York | isbn=0838633218 }}</ref> "Science" therefore had the same sort of very broad meaning that '']'' had at that time. In other Latin influenced languages, including ], ], ], and ], the word corresponding to ''science'' also carried this meaning. | |||
In the past, science was a synonym for "knowledge" or "study", in keeping with its Latin origin. A person who conducted scientific research was called a "natural philosopher" or "man of science".<ref>{{Cite book |last=Cahan |first=David |title=From natural philosophy to the sciences: writing the history of nineteenth-century science |year=2003 |publisher=University of Chicago Press |isbn=0-226-08927-4 |pages=3–15}}</ref> In 1834, ] introduced the term ''scientist'' in a review of ]'s book '']'',<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Ross |first=Sydney |year=1962 |title=Scientist: The story of a word |journal=] |volume=18 |issue=2 |pages=65–85 |doi=10.1080/00033796200202722 |doi-access=free}}</ref> crediting it to "some ingenious gentleman" (possibly himself).<ref>{{cite OED|scientist}}</ref> | |||
Prior to the 18th century, the preferred term for the study of nature among English speakers was "]", while other philosophical disciplines (e.g., ], ], ], ] and ]) were typically referred to as "moral philosophy". (Today, "]" is more-or-less synonymous with "ethics".) Science only became more strongly associated with ] than other sciences gradually with the strong promotion of the importance of experimental ], by people such as ]. With Bacon, begins a more widespread and open criticism of Aristotle's influence which had emphasized theorizing and did not treat raw data collection as part of science itself. An opposed position became common: that what is critical to science at its best is methodical collecting of clear and useful raw data, something which is easier to do in some fields than others. | |||
== History == | |||
The word "science" in English was still however used in the 17th century to refer to the ] concept of knowledge which was secure enough to be used as a prescription for exactly how to accomplish a specific task. With respect to the transitional usage of the term "natural philosophy" in this period, the philosopher ] wrote in 1690 that "natural philosophy is not capable of being made a science".<ref name=Locke1838>{{Cite book | |||
{{Main|History of science}} | |||
| last=Locke | first=J. | authorlink=John Locke | year = 1838 | |||
| title = ] | |||
| publisher = Printed by Thomas Davison | |||
| isbn=0140434828 }}'']''</ref> However, it may be that Locke was not using the word 'science' in the modern sense, but suggesting that 'natural philosophy' could not be deduced in the same way as mathematics and logic.<ref>Kragh, H., ''An intoduction to the historiography of science'', Cambridge University Press, 1989, p.138.</ref> | |||
=== Early history<span class="anchor" id="Earliest roots"></span> === | |||
Locke's assertion notwithstanding, by the early 19th century natural philosophy had begun to separate from philosophy, though it often retained a very broad meaning. In many cases, ''science'' continued to stand for reliable knowledge about any topic, in the same way it is still used today in the broad sense (see the introduction to this article) in modern terms such as ], ], and ]. In the more narrow sense of ''science'', as natural philosophy became linked to an expanding set of well-defined laws (beginning with ]'s laws, ]'s laws, and ]'s laws for motion), it became more popular to refer to natural philosophy as natural science. Over the course of the 19th century, moreover, there was an increased tendency to associate science with study of the natural world (that is, the non-human world). This move sometimes left the study of human thought and society (what would come to be called ]) in a linguistic limbo by the end of the century and into the next.<ref name = Thurs>{{Cite book| first=Daniel Patrick | last=Thurs | year=2007 | title=Science Talk: Changing Notions of Science in American Popular Culture| publisher=] | location=New Brunswick, NJ | isbn = 978-0813540733 | oclc=170031241 | pages=22:55}}</ref> | |||
{{Main|Science in the ancient world}} | |||
] by the ]ns records ]s, written {{circa|1800 BCE}}|alt=Clay tablet with markings, three columns for numbers and one for ordinals]] | |||
Science has no single origin. Rather, scientific thinking emerged gradually over the course of tens of thousands of years,<ref>{{Citation |last=Carruthers |first=Peter |title=The roots of scientific reasoning: infancy, modularity and the art of tracking |date=2 May 2002 |work=The Cognitive Basis of Science |pages=73–96 |editor-last=Carruthers |editor-first=Peter |publisher=Cambridge University Press |doi=10.1017/cbo9780511613517.005 |isbn=978-0-521-81229-0 |editor2-last=Stich |editor2-first=Stephen |editor3-last=Siegal |editor3-first=Michael}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Lombard |first1=Marlize |last2=Gärdenfors |first2=Peter |year=2017 |title=Tracking the Evolution of Causal Cognition in Humans |journal=Journal of Anthropological Sciences |volume=95 |issue=95 |pages=219–234 |doi=10.4436/JASS.95006 |pmid=28489015 |issn=1827-4765}}</ref> taking different forms around the world, and few details are known about the very earliest developments. ] likely played a central role in prehistoric science,<ref>{{cite book |last1=Graeber |first1=David |last2=Wengrow |first2=David |author-link1=David Graeber |author-link2=David Wengrow |year=2021 |title=The Dawn of Everything |title-link=The Dawn of Everything |page=248}}</ref> as did ].<ref>{{cite journal |title=The Faerie Smith Meets the Bronze Industry: Magic Versus Science in the Interpretation of Prehistoric Metal-Making |jstor=124782 |last1=Budd |first1=Paul |last2=Taylor |first2=Timothy |journal=World Archaeology |year=1995 |volume=27 |issue=1 |pages=133–143 |doi=10.1080/00438243.1995.9980297}}</ref> Some scholars use the term "]" to label activities in the past that resemble modern science in some but not all features;<ref>{{cite book |last=Tuomela |first=Raimo |year=1987 |chapter=Science, Protoscience, and Pseudoscience |editor-last1=Pitt |editor-first1=J. C. |editor-last2=Pera |editor-first2=M. |title=Rational Changes in Science |series=Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science |volume=98 |pages=83–101 |publisher=Springer |location=Dordrecht |doi=10.1007/978-94-009-3779-6_4 |isbn=978-94-010-8181-8}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |doi=10.1086/599864 |first=Pamela H. |last=Smith |title=Science on the Move: Recent Trends in the History of Early Modern Science |journal=Renaissance Quarterly |volume=62 |number=2 |year=2009 |pages=345–375 |pmid=19750597 |s2cid=43643053}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Fleck |first=Robert |date=March 2021 |title=Fundamental Themes in Physics from the History of Art |journal=Physics in Perspective |volume=23 |issue=1 |pages=25–48 |doi=10.1007/s00016-020-00269-7 |bibcode=2021PhP....23...25F |s2cid=253597172 |issn=1422-6944 |doi-access=free}}</ref> however, this label has also been criticised as denigrating,<ref>{{cite encyclopedia |last=Scott |first=Colin |encyclopedia=The Postcolonial Science and Technology Studies Reader |title=Science for the West, Myth for the Rest? |publisher=Duke University Press |location=Durham, NC |editor-last=Harding |editor-first=Sandra |isbn=978-0-8223-4936-5 |year=2011 |page=175 |jstor=j.ctv11g96cc.16}}</ref> or too suggestive of ], thinking about those activities only in relation to modern categories.<ref>{{cite journal |doi=10.1177/007327531205000203 |first=Peter |last=Dear |title=Historiography of Not-So-Recent Science |journal=History of Science |volume=50 |number=2 |year=2012 |pages=197–211 |s2cid=141599452}}</ref> | |||
Direct evidence for scientific processes becomes clearer with the advent of ] in the ] civilisations of ] and ] ({{circa|3000–1200 BCE}}), creating the earliest written records in the ].<ref name="Lindberg2007"/>{{rp|pp=12–15}}<ref name="Grant2007" /> Although the words and concepts of "science" and "nature" were not part of the conceptual landscape at the time, the ancient Egyptians and Mesopotamians made contributions that would later find a place in Greek and medieval science: mathematics, astronomy, and medicine.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Rochberg |first1=Francesca |author-link=Francesca Rochberg |editor1-last=Shank |editor1-first=Michael |editor2-last=Numbers |editor2-first=Ronald |editor3-last=Harrison |editor3-first=Peter |title=Wrestling with Nature: From Omens to Science |year=2011 |publisher=University of Chicago Press |isbn=978-0-226-31783-0 |page=9 |chapter=Ch.1 Natural Knowledge in Ancient Mesopotamia}}</ref><ref name="Lindberg2007"/>{{rp|p=12}} From the 3rd millennium BCE, the ancient Egyptians developed a non-positional ],<ref>{{Cite book |last=Krebs |first=Robert E. |title=Groundbreaking Scientific Experiments, Inventions, and Discoveries of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance |publisher=] |year=2004 |isbn=978-0313324338 |page=127}}</ref> solved practical problems using ],<ref>{{cite book |last1=Erlich |first1=Ḥaggai |author-link=Haggai Erlich |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=LcsJosc239YC&q=egyptian%20geometry%20Nile&pg=PA80 |title=The Nile: Histories, Cultures, Myths |last2=Gershoni |first2=Israel |year=2000 |publisher=Lynne Rienner |isbn=978-1-55587-672-2 |pages=80–81 |quote=The Nile occupied an important position in Egyptian culture; it influenced the development of mathematics, geography, and the calendar; Egyptian geometry advanced due to the practice of land measurement "because the overflow of the Nile caused the boundary of each person's land to disappear." |access-date=9 January 2020}}</ref> and developed a ].<ref>{{Cite web |title=Telling Time in Ancient Egypt |url=https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/tell/hd_tell.htm |access-date=27 May 2022 |website=The Met's Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History |archive-date=3 March 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220303133140/https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/tell/hd_tell.htm |url-status=live}}</ref> Their healing therapies involved drug treatments and the supernatural, such as prayers, ]s, and rituals.<ref name="Lindberg2007"/>{{rp|p=9}} | |||
Through the 19th century, many English speakers were increasingly differentiating science (i.e., the natural sciences) from all other forms of knowledge in a variety of ways. The now-familiar expression “],” which refers to the ''prescriptive'' part of how to make discoveries in natural philosophy, was almost unused until then, but became widespread after the 1870s, though there was rarely total agreement about just what it entailed.<ref name = Thurs/><!-- pp. 74–79 --> The word "scientist," meant to refer to a systematically working natural philosopher, (as opposed to an intuitive or empirically minded one) was coined in 1833 by ].<ref name=Ross1962>{{Cite journal| format = PDF | author = Ross, S. | year = 1962 | title = Scientist: The story of a word | journal = Annals of Science | volume = 18 | issue = 2 | pages = 65–85 | url = http://www.informaworld.com/index/739364907.pdf | accessdate = 2008-02-08 | doi = 10.1080/00033796200202722| ref = harv}}</ref> Discussion of ]s as a special group of people who did science, even if their attributes were up for debate, grew in the last half of the 19th century.<ref name = Thurs/><!-- p. 69–74, 79–84 --> Whatever people actually meant by these terms at first, they ultimately depicted science, in the narrow sense of the habitual use of the scientific method and the knowledge derived from it, as something deeply distinguished from all other realms of human endeavor. | |||
The ancient ]ns used knowledge about the properties of various natural chemicals for manufacturing ], ], glass, soap, metals, ], and waterproofing.<ref name="McIntosh2005">{{cite book |last1=McIntosh |first1=Jane R. |author-link=Jane McIntosh |title=Ancient Mesopotamia: New Perspectives |year=2005 |publisher=ABC-CLIO |location=Santa Barbara, CA |isbn=978-1-57607-966-9 |pages=273–276 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=9veK7E2JwkUC&q=science+in+ancient+Mesopotamia |access-date=20 October 2020}}</ref> They studied ], ], ], and ] for ] purposes.<ref>{{Cite journal |title=Scientific Astronomy in Antiquity |last=Aaboe |first=Asger |author-link=Asger Aaboe |journal=] |volume=276 |issue=1257 |date=2 May 1974 |pages=21–42 |doi=10.1098/rsta.1974.0007 |bibcode=1974RSPTA.276...21A |jstor=74272 |s2cid=122508567}}</ref> The Mesopotamians had an ] and the earliest ]s appeared in ] during the ].<ref name="McIntosh2005" /><ref>{{cite journal |title=Medicine, Surgery, and Public Health in Ancient Mesopotamia |first=R. D. |last=Biggs |journal=Journal of Assyrian Academic Studies |volume=19 |number=1 |year=2005 |pages=7–18}}</ref> They seem to have studied scientific subjects which had practical or religious applications and had little interest in satisfying curiosity.<ref name="McIntosh2005" /> | |||
By the 20th century, the modern notion of science as a special kind of knowledge about the world, practiced by a distinct group and pursued through a unique method, was essentially in place. It was used to give legitimacy to a variety of fields through such titles as "scientific" medicine, engineering, advertising, or motherhood.<ref name = Thurs/><!-- p. 95 --> Over the 20th century, links between science and ] also grew increasingly strong. As ] explains, progress in scientific understanding and technology have been synergistic and vital to one another.<ref>http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00sp194/The_Reith_Lectures_Martin_Rees_Scientific_Horizons_2010_What_Well_Never_Know/</ref> | |||
=== Classical antiquity === | |||
] described science, to his students, as: "The principle of science, the definition, almost, is the following: ''The test of all knowledge is experiment.'' Experiment is the ''sole judge'' of scientific 'truth'. But what is the source of knowledge? Where do the laws that are to be tested come from? Experiment, itself, helps to produce these laws, in the sense that it gives us hints. But also needed is imagination to create from these hints the great generalizations — to guess at the wonderful, simple, but very strange patterns beneath them all, and then to experiment to check again whether we have made the right guess." Feynman also observed, "...there is an expanding frontier of ignorance...things must be learned only to be unlearned again or, more likely, to be corrected."<ref>Feynman, Leighton, Sands. "The Feynman Lectures On Physics", pp. 1–1, ], 1964.</ref> | |||
{{Main|Science in classical antiquity}} | |||
], made between 100 BCE and 79 CE, shows many Greek philosophers and scholars|alt=Framed mosaic of philosophers gathering around and conversing]] | |||
In ], there is no real ancient analogue of a modern scientist. Instead, well-educated, usually upper-class, and almost universally male individuals performed various investigations into nature whenever they could afford the time.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Lehoux |first1=Daryn |editor1-last=Shank |editor1-first=Michael |editor2-last=Numbers |editor2-first=Ronald |editor3-last=Harrison |editor3-first=Peter |title=Wrestling with Nature: From Omens to Science |year=2011 |publisher=University of Chicago Press |isbn=978-0-226-31783-0 |page=39 |chapter=2. Natural Knowledge in the Classical World}}</ref> Before the invention or discovery of the ] of '']'' or nature by the ]s, the same words tend to be used to describe the natural "way" in which a plant grows,<ref>An account of the pre-Socratic use of the concept of φύσις may be found in {{cite book |last=Naddaf |first=Gerard |year=2006 |title=The Greek Concept of Nature |publisher=SUNY Press |postscript=,}} and in {{cite journal |last1=Ducarme |first1=Frédéric |last2=Couvet |first2=Denis |year=2020 |title=What does 'nature' mean? |journal=] |volume=6 |issue=14 |publisher=] |doi=10.1057/s41599-020-0390-y |doi-access=free |url=https://hal.science/hal-02554932/file/s41599-020-0390-y.pdf |access-date=16 August 2023 |archive-date=16 August 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230816053756/https://hal.science/hal-02554932/file/s41599-020-0390-y.pdf |url-status=live}} The word φύσις, while first used in connection with a plant in Homer, occurs early in Greek philosophy, and in several senses. Generally, these senses match rather well the current senses in which the English word ''nature'' is used, as confirmed by {{cite book |last=Guthrie |first=W. K. C. |title=Presocratic Tradition from Parmenides to Democritus |postscript=none}} (volume 2 of his ''History of Greek Philosophy''), Cambridge University Press, 1965.</ref> and the "way" in which, for example, one tribe worships a particular god. For this reason, it is claimed that these men were the first philosophers in the strict sense and the first to clearly distinguish "nature" and "convention".<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Strauss |first1=Leo |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=cpx2j0TumyIC |title=An Introduction to Political Philosophy: Ten Essays by Leo Strauss |last2=Gildin |first2=Hilail |publisher=] |isbn=978-0814319024 |chapter=Progress or Return? The Contemporary Crisis in Western Education |year=1989 |access-date=30 May 2022 |page=209}}</ref> | |||
The early ] of the Milesian school, which was founded by ] and later continued by his successors ] and ], were the first to attempt to explain ] without relying on the ].<ref>{{cite book |last1=O'Grady |first1=Patricia F. |author-link=Patricia O'Grady |title=Thales of Miletus: The Beginnings of Western Science and Philosophy |year=2016 |publisher=Routledge |location=New York |isbn=978-0-7546-0533-1 |page=245 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ZTUlDwAAQBAJ&q=Thales+of+Miletus+first+scientist&pg=PA245 |access-date=20 October 2020}}</ref> The ] developed a complex number philosophy<ref name="Burkert1972">{{cite book |last=Burkert |first=Walter |author-link=Walter Burkert |date=1 June 1972 |title=Lore and Science in Ancient Pythagoreanism |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=0qqp4Vk1zG0C&q=Pythagoreanism |location=Cambridge, MA |publisher=Harvard University Press |isbn=978-0-674-53918-1}}</ref>{{rp|467–468}} and contributed significantly to the development of mathematical science.<ref name="Burkert1972" />{{rp|465}} The ] was developed by the Greek philosopher ] and his student ].<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Pullman |first1=Bernard |title=The Atom in the History of Human Thought |year=1998 |isbn=978-0-19-515040-7 |pages=31–33 |publisher=Oxford University Press |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=IQs5hur-BpgC&q=Leucippus+Democritus+atom&pg=PA56 |bibcode=1998ahht.book.....P |access-date=20 October 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |editor1-last=Cohen |editor1-first=Henri |editor2-last=Lefebvre |editor2-first=Claire |title=Handbook of Categorization in Cognitive Science |year=2017 |publisher=Elsevier |location=Amsterdam |isbn=978-0-08-101107-2 |page=427 |edition=2nd |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=zIrCDQAAQBAJ&q=Leucippus+Democritus+atom&pg=PA427 |access-date=20 October 2020}}</ref> Later, ] would develop a full natural cosmology based on atomism, and would adopt a "canon" (ruler, standard) which established physical criteria or standards of scientific truth.<ref>] ({{floruit}}1st cenruty BCE) ''{{lang|la|]}}''</ref> The Greek doctor ] established the tradition of systematic medical science<ref>{{cite book |last=Margotta |first=Roberto |year=1968 |title=The Story of Medicine |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=vFZrAAAAMAAJ |location=New York |publisher=] |access-date=18 November 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Touwaide |first1=Alain |title=Medieval Science, Technology, and Medicine: An Encyclopedia |year=2005 |editor1-last=Glick |editor1-first=Thomas F. |editor2-last=Livesey |editor2-first=Steven |editor3-last=Wallis |editor3-first=Faith |publisher=Routledge |location=New York |isbn=978-0-415-96930-7 |page=224 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=77y2AgAAQBAJ&q=Hippocrates+medical+science&pg=PA224 |access-date=20 October 2020}}</ref> and is known as "]".<ref>{{cite book |last1=Leff |first1=Samuel |last2=Leff |first2=Vera |year=1956 |title=From Witchcraft to World Health |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=HjNrAAAAMAAJ |location=London |publisher=Macmillan |access-date=23 August 2020}}</ref> | |||
==Basic classifications== | |||
] are commonly divided into two major groups: ]s, which study natural phenomena (including ]), and ], which study ] and ]. These groupings are ] sciences, which means the knowledge must be based on observable ] and capable of being tested for its validity by other researchers working under the same conditions.<ref name=Popper>{{Cite book| last = Popper | first = Karl | authorlink = Karl Popper | title = The Logic of Scientific Discovery | origyear = 1959 | edition = 2nd English | year = 2002 | publisher = Routledge Classics | location = New York, NY | isbn = 0-415-27844-9 | oclc =59377149 }}</ref><!-- p. 20 --> There are also related disciplines that are grouped into interdisciplinary and applied sciences, such as ] and ]. Within these categories are specialized scientific fields that can include parts of other scientific disciplines but often possess their own terminology and expertise.<ref>See: {{Cite web| author=Editorial Staff | date=March 7, 2008 | url=http://www.seedmagazine.com/news/2007/03/scientific_method_relationship.php | title=Scientific Method: Relationships among Scientific Paradigms | publisher=Seed magazine | accessdate=2007-09-12 }}</ref> | |||
A turning point in the history of early philosophical science was ]' example of applying philosophy to the study of human matters, including human nature, the nature of political communities, and human knowledge itself. The ] as documented by ]'s dialogues is a ] method of hypothesis elimination: better hypotheses are found by steadily identifying and eliminating those that lead to contradictions. The Socratic method searches for general commonly-held truths that shape beliefs and scrutinises them for consistency.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0170%3Atext%3DApol.%3Apage%3D17 |title=Plato, Apology |page=17 |access-date=1 November 2017 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180129145253/http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0170%3Atext%3DApol.%3Apage%3D17 |archive-date=29 January 2018}}</ref> Socrates criticised the older type of study of physics as too purely speculative and lacking in ].<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0170%3Atext%3DApol.%3Apage%3D27 |title=Plato, Apology |page=27 |access-date=1 November 2017 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180129145253/http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0170%3Atext%3DApol.%3Apage%3D27 |archive-date=29 January 2018}}</ref> | |||
], which is classified as a ],<ref></ref><ref>Benedikt Löwe (2002) </ref> has both similarities and differences with the empirical sciences (the natural and social sciences). It is similar to empirical sciences in that it involves an objective, careful and systematic study of an area of knowledge; it is different because of its method of verifying its knowledge, using ] rather than empirical methods.<ref name=Popper/><!-- pp. 10–11 --> The formal sciences, which also include ] and ], are vital to the empirical sciences. Major advances in formal science have often led to major advances in the empirical sciences. The formal sciences are essential in the formation of ], ], and ],<ref name=Popper/><!-- pp. 79–82 --> both in discovering and describing how things work (natural sciences) and how people think and act (social sciences). | |||
In the 4th century BCE, ] created a systematic programme of ] philosophy.<ref>{{cite book |author1=Aristotle |title=Nicomachean Ethics |edition=H. Rackham |url=https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0054%3Abekker%20page%3D1139b |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120317140402/http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc= |archive-date=17 March 2012 |access-date=22 September 2010 |at=1139b}}</ref> In the 3rd century BCE, Greek astronomer ] was the first to propose a ] of the universe, with the Sun at the centre and all the planets orbiting it.<ref name="McClellan2015">{{cite book |last1=McClellan |first1=James E. III |last2=Dorn |first2=Harold |title=Science and Technology in World History: An Introduction |year=2015 |publisher=Johns Hopkins University Press |location=Baltimore |isbn=978-1-4214-1776-9 |pages=99–100 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ah1ECwAAQBAJ&q=Aristarchus+heliocentrism&pg=PA99 |access-date=20 October 2020}}</ref> Aristarchus's model was widely rejected because it was believed to violate the laws of physics,<ref name="McClellan2015" /> while Ptolemy's '']'', which contains a geocentric description of the ], was accepted through the early Renaissance instead.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Graßhoff |first=Gerd |title=The History of Ptolemy's Star Catalogue |year=1990 |publisher=Springer |isbn=978-1-4612-8788-9 |series=Studies in the History of Mathematics and Physical Sciences |volume=14 |location=New York |doi=10.1007/978-1-4612-4468-4}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last=Hoffmann |first=Susanne M. |title=Hipparchs Himmelsglobus |year=2017 |publisher=Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden |isbn=978-3-658-18682-1 |location=Wiesbaden |language=de |doi=10.1007/978-3-658-18683-8 |bibcode=2017hihi.book.....H}}</ref> The inventor and mathematician ] made major contributions to the beginnings of ].<ref>{{cite book |last1=Edwards |first1=C. H. Jr. |title=The Historical Development of the Calculus |year=1979 |publisher=Springer |location=New York |isbn=978-0-387-94313-8 |page=75 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ilrlBwAAQBAJ&q=Archimedes+calculus&pg=PA75 |access-date=20 October 2020}}</ref> ] was a Roman writer and polymath, who wrote the seminal encyclopaedia '']''.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Lawson |first1=Russell M. |title=Science in the Ancient World: An Encyclopedia |year=2004 |publisher=ABC-CLIO |location=Santa Barbara, CA |isbn=978-1-85109-539-1 |pages=190–191 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=1AY1ALzh9V0C&q=Pliny+the+Elder+encyclopedia&pg=PA190 |access-date=20 October 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Murphy |first1=Trevor Morgan |title=Pliny the Elder's Natural History: The Empire in the Encyclopedia |year=2004 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-926288-5 |page=1 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=6NC_T_tG9lQC&q=Pliny+the+Elder+encyclopedia |access-date=20 October 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Doody |first1=Aude |title=Pliny's Encyclopedia: The Reception of the Natural History |year=2010 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-1-139-48453-4 |page=1 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=YoEhAwAAQBAJ&q=Pliny+the+Elder+encyclopedia |access-date=20 October 2020}}</ref> | |||
==Scientific method== | |||
{{Main|Scientific method}} | |||
A ] seeks to explain the events of ] in a ] way, and to use these findings to make useful ]s. This is done partly through observation of natural phenomena, but also through experimentation that tries to simulate natural events under controlled conditions. Taken in its entirety, a scientific method allows for highly creative problem solving whilst minimizing any effects of subjective bias on the part of its users (namely the ]).<ref name=backer>{{Cite web | |||
| last=Backer | first=Patricia Ryaby | |||
| date=October 29, 2004 | |||
| url=http://www.engr.sjsu.edu/pabacker/scientific_method.htm | |||
| title=What is the scientific method? | |||
| publisher=San Jose State University | |||
| accessdate=2008-03-28 }}</ref> | |||
] for representing numbers likely emerged between the 3rd and 5th centuries CE along Indian trade routes. This numeral system made efficient ] operations more accessible and would eventually become standard for mathematics worldwide.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Conner |first=Clifford D. |title=A People's History of Science: Miners, Midwives, and "Low Mechanicks" |year=2005 |publisher=Nation Books |isbn=1-56025-748-2 |location=New York |pages=72–74}}</ref> | |||
===Basic and applied research=== | |||
Although some scientific research is ] into specific problems, a great deal of our understanding comes from the curiosity-driven undertaking of ]. This leads to options for technological advance that were not planned or sometimes even imaginable. This point was made by Michael Faraday when, allegedly in response to the question "what is the ''use'' of basic research?" he responded "Sir, what is the use of a new-born child?".<ref>http://richarddawkins.net/articles/91</ref> For example, research into the effects of red light on the human eye's ] did not seem to have any practical purpose; eventually, the discovery that our ] is not troubled by red light would lead militaries to adopt red light in the cockpits of all jet fighters.<ref>Stanovich, 2007, pp 106–110</ref> | |||
In a nutshell: Basic research is the search for knowledge. Applied research is the search for solutions to practical problems using this knowledge. Finally, even basic research can take unexpected turns, and there is some sense in which the scientific method is built to ]. | |||
=== Middle Ages === | |||
===Experimentation and hypothesizing=== | |||
{{Main|History of science#Middle Ages}} | |||
] determines the genetic structure of all known life]] | |||
] depicts a ], made in the 6th century|alt=Picture of a peacock on very old paper]] | |||
Due to the ], the 5th century saw an intellectual decline, with knowledge of classical Greek conceptions of the world deteriorating in Western Europe.<ref name="Lindberg2007"/>{{rp|p=194}} Latin encyclopaedists of the period such as ] preserved the majority of general ancient knowledge.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Grant |first1=Edward |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=YyvmEyX6rZgC |title=The Foundations of Modern Science in the Middle Ages: Their Religious, Institutional and Intellectual Contexts |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=1996 |isbn=978-0-521-56762-6 |series=Cambridge Studies in the History of Science |pages=7–17 |access-date=9 November 2018}}</ref> In contrast, because the ] resisted attacks from invaders, they were able to preserve and improve prior learning.<ref name="Lindberg2007"/>{{rp|p=159}} ], a Byzantine scholar in the 6th century, started to question Aristotle's teaching of physics, introducing the ].<ref name="Lindberg2007"/>{{rp|pp=307, 311, 363, 402}} His criticism served as an inspiration to medieval scholars and Galileo Galilei, who extensively cited his works ten centuries later.<ref name="Lindberg2007"/>{{rp|pp=307–308}}<ref>{{cite encyclopedia |title=Philoponus |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2016/entries/philoponus/ |encyclopedia=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |first=Christian |last=Wildberg |editor-first=Edward N. |editor-last=Zalta |date=1 May 2018 |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |access-date=1 May 2018 |archive-date=22 August 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190822110331/https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2016/entries/philoponus/ |url-status=live}}</ref> | |||
Based on observations of a phenomenon, scientists may generate a ]. This is an attempt to describe or depict the phenomenon in terms of a logical, physical or mathematical representation. As empirical evidence is gathered, scientists can suggest a ] to explain the phenomenon. Hypotheses may be formulated using principles such as ] (also known as "]") and are generally expected to seek ] - fitting well with other accepted facts related to the phenomena. This new explanation is used to make ] predictions that are testable by experiment or observation. When a hypothesis proves unsatisfactory, it is either modified or discarded. | |||
Experimentation is especially important in science to help establish a ] (to avoid the ]). ] also plays an important role in coordinating research in/across different fields. | |||
During ] and the ], natural phenomena were mainly examined via the Aristotelian approach. The approach includes Aristotle's ]: material, formal, moving, and final cause.<ref>{{Cite encyclopedia |title=Aristotle on Causality |last=Falcon |first=Andrea |editor-last=Zalta |year=2019 |editor-first=Edward |encyclopedia=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |edition=Spring 2019 |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2019/entries/aristotle-causality/#FouCau |access-date=3 October 2020 |archive-date=9 October 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201009032459/https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2019/entries/aristotle-causality/#FouCau |url-status=live}}</ref> Many Greek classical texts were preserved by the ] and ] translations were done by groups such as the ] and the ]. Under the Abbasids, these Arabic translations were later improved and developed by Arabic scientists.<ref>{{cite book |last=Grant |first=Edward |url=https://archive.org/details/historynaturalph00gran |title=A History of Natural Philosophy: From the Ancient World to the Nineteenth Century |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=2007 |isbn=978-0-521-68957-1 |pages=–67 |chapter=Islam and the eastward shift of Aristotelian natural philosophy |url-access=limited}}</ref> By the 6th and 7th centuries, the neighbouring ] established the medical ], which was considered by Greek, Syriac, and Persian physicians as the most important medical hub of the ancient world.<ref>{{Cite book |title=The Cambridge history of Iran |date=1968–1991 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |last=Fisher |first=W. B. |isbn=978-0-521-20093-6}}</ref> | |||
Once a hypothesis has survived testing, it may become adopted into the framework of a ]. This is a logically reasoned, self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of certain natural phenomena. A theory typically describes the behavior of much broader sets of phenomena than a hypothesis; commonly, a large number of hypotheses can be logically bound together by a single theory. Thus a theory is a hypothesis explaining various other hypotheses. In that vein, theories are formulated according to most of the same scientific principles as hypotheses. | |||
Islamic study of ] flourished in the ] established in the Abbasid capital of ], Iraq<ref>{{cite encyclopedia |url=https://www.britannica.com/place/Bayt-al-Hikmah |title=Bayt al-Hikmah |encyclopedia=Encyclopædia Britannica |access-date=3 November 2016 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161104043313/https://www.britannica.com/place/Bayt-al-Hikmah |archive-date=4 November 2016}}</ref> and the flourished<ref>{{Cite book |editor-last=Hossein Nasr |editor-first=Seyyed |title=History of Islamic Philosophy |title-link=History of Islamic Philosophy |editor-last2=Leaman |editor-first2=Oliver |publisher=Routledge |year=2001 |isbn=978-0415259347 |pages=165–167 |editor-link=Seyyed Hossein Nasr}}</ref> until the ] in the 13th century. ], better known as Alhazen, used controlled experiments in his optical study.{{efn|name=doubtPtolemy|1= Ibn al-Haytham's '']'' Book I, . pages 372 and 408 disputed Claudius Ptolemy's extramission theory of vision; "Hence, the extramission of rays is superfluous and useless". —A.Mark Smith's translation of the Latin version of ].<ref name="Smith2001" />{{rp|Book I, . pp. 372, 408}} }}<ref>{{cite journal |jstor=228328 |last1=Toomer |first1=G. J. |title=Reviewed work: Ibn al-Haythams Weg zur Physik, Matthias Schramm |journal=Isis |volume=55 |issue=4 |pages=463–465 |year=1964 |doi=10.1086/349914}} See p. 464: "Schramm sums up achievement in the development of scientific method.", p. 465: "Schramm has demonstrated .. beyond any dispute that Ibn al-Haytham is a major figure in the Islamic scientific tradition, particularly in the creation of experimental techniques." p. 465: "only when the influence of Ibn al-Haytham and others on the mainstream of later medieval physical writings has been seriously investigated can Schramm's claim that Ibn al-Haytham was the true founder of modern physics be evaluated."</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Cohen |first1=H. Floris |author-link=Floris Cohen |chapter=Greek nature knowledge transplanted: The Islamic world |title=How modern science came into the world. Four civilizations, one 17th-century breakthrough |year=2010 |pages=99–156 |publisher=Amsterdam University Press |isbn=978-90-8964-239-4 |edition=2nd}}</ref> ]'s compilation of '']'', a medical encyclopaedia, is considered to be one of the most important publications in medicine and was used until the 18th century.<ref>{{Cite book |title=Encyclopaedia of the History of Science, Technology, and Medicine in Non-Western Cultures |url=https://archive.org/details/encyclopaediahis00seli |url-access=limited |year=2006 |pages=–156 |publisher=Springer |bibcode=2008ehst.book.....S |isbn=978-1-4020-4559-2 |editor-last1=Selin |editor-first1=Helaine |editor-link=Helaine Selin}}</ref> | |||
While performing experiments, ]s may have a preference for one outcome over another, and so it is important to ensure that science as a whole can eliminate this bias.<ref>{{Cite web | |||
| last=van Gelder | first=Tim | year=1999 | |||
| url=http://www.philosophy.unimelb.edu.au/tgelder/papers/HeadsIWin.pdf | |||
| format=PDF | |||
| title="Heads I win, tails you lose": A Foray Into the Psychology of Philosophy | |||
| publisher=University of Melbourne | |||
| accessdate=2008-03-28 | |||
|archiveurl = http://web.archive.org/web/20080409054240/http://www.philosophy.unimelb.edu.au/tgelder/papers/HeadsIWin.pdf <!-- Bot retrieved archive --> |archivedate = 2008-04-09}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web | |||
| last=Pease | first=Craig | |||
| date=September 6, 2006 | |||
| url=http://law-and-science.net/Science4BLJ/Scientific_Method/Deliberate.bias/Text.htm | |||
| title=Chapter 23. Deliberate bias: Conflict creates bad science | |||
| work=Science for Business, Law and Journalism | |||
| publisher=Vermont Law School | |||
| accessdate=2008-03-28 | |||
}}</ref> This can be achieved by careful ], transparency, and a thorough ] process of the experimental results as well as any conclusions.<ref>{{Cite book | |||
| first=David | last=Shatz | year=2004 | |||
| title=Peer Review: A Critical Inquiry | |||
| publisher=Rowman & Littlefield | isbn=074251434X | |||
| oclc=54989960 | |||
}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book | |||
| first=Sheldon | last=Krimsky | year=2003 | |||
| title=Science in the Private Interest: Has the Lure of Profits Corrupted the Virtue of Biomedical Research | |||
| publisher=Rowman & Littlefield | isbn=074251479X | |||
| oclc=185926306 }}</ref> After the results of an experiment are announced or published, it is normal practice for independent researchers to double-check how the research was performed, and to follow up by performing similar experiments to determine how dependable the results might be.<ref>{{Cite book | |||
| first=Ruth Ellen | last=Bulger | year=2002 | |||
| coauthors=Heitman, Elizabeth; Reiser, Stanley Joel | |||
| title=The Ethical Dimensions of the Biological and Health Sciences | |||
| edition=2nd | isbn=0521008867 | |||
| publisher=Cambridge University Press | |||
| oclc=47791316 }}</ref> | |||
By the 11th century, most of Europe had become Christian,<ref name="Lindberg2007"/>{{rp|p=204}} and in 1088, the ] emerged as the first university in Europe.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Russell |first=Josiah C. |year=1959 |title=Gratian, Irnerius, and the Early Schools of Bologna |journal=] |volume=12 |issue=4 |pages=168–188 |jstor=26473232 |quote=Perhaps even as early as 1088 (the date officially set for the founding of the University)}}</ref> As such, demand for Latin translation of ancient and scientific texts grew,<ref name="Lindberg2007"/>{{rp|p=204}} a major contributor to the ]. Renaissance ] in western Europe flourished, with experiments done by observing, describing, and classifying subjects in nature.<ref>{{cite encyclopedia |url=https://www.britannica.com/biography/Saint-Albertus-Magnus |title=St. Albertus Magnus |encyclopedia=Encyclopædia Britannica |access-date=27 October 2017 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171028045424/https://www.britannica.com/biography/Saint-Albertus-Magnus |archive-date=28 October 2017}}</ref> In the 13th century, medical teachers and students at Bologna began opening human bodies, leading to the first anatomy textbook based on human dissection by ].<ref>{{cite book |last=Numbers |first=Ronald |url=http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674057418 |title=Galileo Goes to Jail and Other Myths about Science and Religion |publisher=Harvard University Press |year=2009 |isbn=978-0-674-03327-6 |page=45 |access-date=27 March 2018}}</ref> | |||
===Certainty and science=== | |||
A scientific theory is ], and is always open to ] if new evidence is presented. That is, no theory is ever considered strictly ] as science accepts the concept of ]. The philosopher of science ] sharply distinguishes truth from certainty. He writes that scientific knowledge "consists in the search for truth", but it "is not the search for certainty ... All human knowledge is fallible and therefore uncertain.<ref>Popper, KR. ''In search of a better world'', Routledge, 1996, p.4.</ref>" | |||
] is still widely regarded as an example of taking ] too far]]Theories very rarely result in vast changes in our understanding. According to psychologist ], it may be the media's overuse of words like "breakthrough" that leads the public to imagine that science is constantly proving everything it thought was true to be false.<ref>{{harvnb|Stanovich|2007}} pg 119–138</ref> While there are such famous cases as the ] that required a complete reconceptualization, these are extreme exceptions. Knowledge in science is gained by a gradual synthesis of information from different experiments, by various researchers, across different domains of science; it is more like a climb than a leap.<ref>{{harvnb|Stanovich|2007}} pg 123</ref> Theories vary in the extent to which they have been tested and verified, as well as their acceptance in the scientific community. For example, ], ], and ] still bear the name "theory" even though, in practice, they are considered ]ual.<ref>{{cite news| url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2005/sep/01/schools.research | location=London | work=The Guardian | title=One side can be wrong | first1=Richard | last1=Dawkins | first2=Jerry | last2=Coyne | date=2005-09-02}}</ref> | |||
Philosopher ] adds that, although the best definition for "]" is contested, being ] and entertaining the ''possibility'' that one is incorrect is compatible with being correct. Ironically then, the scientist adhering to proper scientific method will doubt themselves even once they possess the ].<ref>http://philosophybites.com/2007/12/barry-stroud-on.html</ref> The ] ] argued that inquiry is the struggle to resolve actual doubt and that merely quarrelsome, verbal, or ] is fruitless<ref>Peirce (1877), "The Fixation of Belief", Popular Science Monthly, v. 12, pp. 1–15, see §IV on . Reprinted ''Collected Papers'' v. 5, paragraphs 358–87 (see 374–6), ''Writings'' v. 3, pp. 242–57 (see 247–8), ''Essential Peirce'' v. 1, pp. 109–23 (see 114–15), and elsewhere.</ref>—but also that the inquirer should try to attain genuine doubt rather than resting uncritically on common sense.<ref>Peirce (1905), "Issues of Pragmaticism", ''The Monist'', v. XV, n. 4, pp. 481–99, see "Character V" on . Reprinted in ''Collected Papers'' v. 5, paragraphs 438–63 (see 451), ''Essential Peirce'' v. 2, pp. 346–59 (see 353), and elsewhere.</ref> He held that the successful sciences trust, not to any single chain of inference (no stronger than its weakest link), but to the cable of multiple and various arguments intimately connected.<ref>Peirce (1868), "Some Consequences of Four Incapacities", ''Journal of Speculative Philosophy'' v. 2, n. 3, pp. 140–57, see . Reprinted in ''Collected Papers'', v. 5, paragraphs 264–317, ''Writings'' v. 2, pp. 211–42, ''Essential Peirce'' v. 1, pp. 28–55, and elsewhere.</ref> | |||
=== Renaissance === | |||
Stanovich also asserts that science avoids searching for a "magic bullet"; it avoids the ]. This means a scientist would not ask merely "What is ''the'' cause of...", but rather "What ''are'' the most significant ''causes'' of...". This is especially the case in the more macroscopic fields of science (e.g. ], ]).<ref name="Stanovich, 2007, pp 141–147">{{harvnb|Stanovich|2007}} pp 141–147</ref> Of course, research often analyzes few factors at once, but this always to add to the long list of factors that are most important to consider.<ref name="Stanovich, 2007, pp 141–147"/> For example: knowing the details of only a person's genetics, or their history and upbringing, or the current situation may not explain a behaviour, but a deep understanding of all these variables combined can be very predictive. | |||
{{Main|Scientific Revolution|Science in the Renaissance}} | |||
]}}''|alt=Drawing of planets' orbit around the Sun]] | |||
New developments in optics played a role in the inception of the ], both by challenging long-held ] ideas on perception, as well as by contributing to the improvement and development of technology such as the ] and the ]. At the start of the Renaissance, ], ], and ] each built up a scholastic ] upon a causal chain beginning with sensation, perception, and finally ] of the individual and universal ] of Aristotle.<ref name="Smith2001">{{cite book |last=Smith |first=A. Mark |title=Alhacen's Theory of Visual Perception: A Critical Edition, with English Translation and Commentary, of the First Three Books of Alhacen's ''De Aspectibus'', the Medieval Latin Version of Ibn al-Haytham's ''Kitāb al-Manāẓir'', 2 vols |title-link=De Aspectibus |publisher=] |year=2001 |isbn=978-0-87169-914-5 |series=Transactions of the American Philosophical Society |volume=91 |location=Philadelphia |issue=4–5}}</ref>{{rp|Book I}} A model of vision later known as ] was ] by the artists of the Renaissance. This theory uses only three of Aristotle's four causes: formal, material, and final.<ref name="Smith1981">{{Cite journal |jstor=231249 |doi=10.1086/352843 |pmid=7040292 |title=Getting the Big Picture in Perspectivist Optics |journal=Isis |volume=72 |issue=4 |pages=568–589 |last1=Smith |first1=A. Mark |year=1981 |s2cid=27806323}}</ref> | |||
In the 16th century, ] formulated a ] of the Solar System, stating that the planets revolve around the Sun, instead of the ] where the planets and the Sun revolve around the Earth. This was based on a theorem that the ]s of the planets are longer as their orbs are farther from the centre of motion, which he found not to agree with Ptolemy's model.<ref>{{Cite journal |doi=10.1177/002182860203300301 |title=Copernicus and the Origin of his Heliocentric System |journal=Journal for the History of Astronomy |volume=33 |issue=3 |pages=219–235 |year=2016 |last1=Goldstein |first1=Bernard R. |s2cid=118351058 |url=http://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/e610/194b7b608cab49e034a542017213d827fb70.pdf |access-date=12 April 2020 |archive-date=12 April 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200412211013/http://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/e610/194b7b608cab49e034a542017213d827fb70.pdf |url-status=dead}}</ref><!-- Censorship and such from the church --> | |||
==Mathematics== | |||
{{Main|Mathematics}} | |||
]]] | |||
] is essential to the sciences. One important function of mathematics in science is the role it plays in the expression of scientific ''models''. Observing and collecting measurements, as well as hypothesizing and predicting, often require extensive use of mathematics. ], ], ], ] and ], for example, are all essential to ]. Virtually every branch of mathematics has applications in science, including "pure" areas such as ] and ]. | |||
] and others challenged the notion that the only function of the eye is perception, and shifted the main focus in optics from the eye to the propagation of light.<ref name="Smith1981" /><ref>{{cite book |last1=Cohen |first1=H. Floris |author-link=Floris Cohen |chapter=Greek nature knowledge transplanted and more: Renaissance Europe |title=How modern science came into the world. Four civilizations, one 17th-century breakthrough |year=2010 |pages=99–156 |publisher=Amsterdam University Press |isbn=978-90-8964-239-4 |edition=2nd}}</ref> Kepler is best known, however, for improving Copernicus' heliocentric model through the discovery of ]. Kepler did not reject Aristotelian metaphysics and described his work as a search for the ].<ref>{{Cite book |last=Koestler |first=Arthur |url=https://archive.org/details/sleepwalkershist00koes_0/page/1 |title=The Sleepwalkers: A History of Man's Changing Vision of the Universe |publisher=Penguin |year=1990 |isbn=0-14-019246-8 |location=London |page= |author-link=Arthur Koestler |orig-date=1959}}</ref> ] had made significant contributions to astronomy, physics and engineering. However, he became persecuted after Pope Urban VIII sentenced him for writing about the heliocentric model.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://galileo.rice.edu/gal/urban.html |title=Pope Urban VIII |last=van Helden |first=Al |year=1995 |website=The Galileo Project |access-date=3 November 2016 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161111033150/http://galileo.rice.edu/gal/urban.html |archive-date=11 November 2016}}</ref> | |||
], which are mathematical techniques for summarizing and analyzing data, allow scientists to assess the level of reliability and the range of variation in experimental results. Statistical analysis plays a fundamental role in many areas of both the natural sciences and social sciences. | |||
The ] was widely used to publish scholarly arguments, including some that disagreed widely with contemporary ideas of nature.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Gingerich |first=Owen |title=Copernicus and the Impact of Printing |journal=Vistas in Astronomy |volume=17 |year=1975 |issue=1 |pages=201–218 |doi=10.1016/0083-6656(75)90061-6 |bibcode=1975VA.....17..201G}}</ref> ] and ] published philosophical arguments in favour of a new type of non-Aristotelian science. Bacon emphasised the importance of experiment over contemplation, questioned the Aristotelian concepts of formal and final cause, promoted the idea that science should study the ] and the improvement of all human life.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Zagorin |first=Perez |title=Francis Bacon |page=84 |year=1998 |publisher=Princeton University Press |isbn=978-0-691-00966-7}}</ref> Descartes emphasised individual thought and argued that mathematics rather than geometry should be used to study nature.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Davis |first1=Philip J. |last2=Hersh |first2=Reuben |year=1986 |title=Descartes' Dream: The World According to Mathematics |location=Cambridge, MA |publisher=]}}</ref><!-- This updated approach to studies in nature was seen as ]. discuss --> | |||
] applies computing power to simulate real-world situations, enabling a better understanding of scientific problems than formal mathematics alone can achieve. According to the ], computation is now as important as theory and experiment in advancing scientific knowledge.<ref>, SIAM Working Group on CSE Education. Retrieved 2008-04-27.</ref> | |||
=== Age of Enlightenment === | |||
Whether mathematics itself is properly classified as science has been a matter of some debate. Some thinkers see mathematicians as scientists, regarding physical experiments as inessential or mathematical proofs as equivalent to experiments. Others do not see mathematics as a science, since it does not require an experimental test of its theories and hypotheses. Mathematical ]s and ]s are obtained by ] derivations which presume ]atic systems, rather than the combination of ] observation and logical reasoning that has come to be known as ]. In general, mathematics is classified as ], while natural and social sciences are classified as ] sciences.<ref>{{Cite book| title = Philosophy of Science: From Problem to Theory | author = Bunge, Mario Augusto | year = 1998 | publisher = Transaction Publishers | isbn = 0-765-80413-1 | page = 24}}</ref> | |||
{{Main|Science in the Age of Enlightenment}} | |||
]}}'' by Isaac Newton]] | |||
At the start of the ], ] formed the foundation of ] by his ''{{lang|la|]}}'', greatly influencing future physicists.<ref>{{cite book |last=Gribbin |first=John |title=Science: A History 1543–2001 |year=2002 |page=241 |publisher=Allen Lane |isbn=978-0-7139-9503-9 |quote=Although it was just one of the many factors in the Enlightenment, the success of Newtonian physics in providing a mathematical description of an ordered world clearly played a big part in the flowering of this movement in the eighteenth century}}</ref> ] incorporated terms from ], now used in a new non-] way. This implied a shift in the view of objects: objects were now considered as having no innate goals. Leibniz assumed that different types of things all work according to the same general laws of nature, with no special formal or final causes.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://mathshistory.st-andrews.ac.uk/Biographies/Leibniz/ |title=Gottfried Leibniz – Biography |website=Maths History |access-date=2 March 2021 |archive-date=11 July 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170711221621/http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Biographies/Leibniz.html |url-status=live}}</ref> | |||
During this time the declared purpose and value of science became producing wealth and inventions that would improve human lives, in the ] sense of having more food, clothing, and other things. In ], "the real and legitimate goal of sciences {{em|is the endowment of human life with new inventions and riches}}", and he discouraged scientists from pursuing intangible philosophical or spiritual ideas, which he believed contributed little to human happiness beyond "the fume of subtle, sublime or pleasing ".<ref>{{Cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=PgmbZIybuRoC&pg=PA162 |title=The Social and Economic Roots of the Scientific Revolution: Texts by Boris Hessen and Henryk Grossmann |last1=Freudenthal |first1=Gideon |last2=McLaughlin |first2=Peter |date=20 May 2009 |publisher=Springer |isbn=978-1-4020-9604-4 |access-date=25 July 2018}}</ref> | |||
==Scientific community== | |||
] causes a ] to levitate above a ]]] | |||
Science during the Enlightenment was dominated by ] and ],<ref>{{Cite book |editor-last1=Goddard Bergin |editor-first1=Thomas |editor1-link=Thomas G. Bergin |url=https://archive.org/details/encyclopediaofre0000unse_d0p5 |title=Encyclopedia of the Renaissance |editor-last2=Speake |editor-first2=Jennifer |editor2-link=Jennifer Speake |year=1987 |publisher=Facts on File |isbn=978-0816013159}}</ref> which had largely replaced universities as centres of scientific research and development. Societies and academies were the backbones of the maturation of the scientific profession. Another important development was the ] of science among an increasingly literate population.<ref>{{Cite book |last=van Horn Melton |first=James |url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/rise-of-the-public-in-enlightenment-europe/BA532085A260114CD430D9A059BD96EF |title=The Rise of the Public in Enlightenment Europe |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=2001 |isbn=978-0511819421 |doi=10.1017/CBO9780511819421 |access-date=27 May 2022 |url-access=subscription |pages=82–83}}</ref> Enlightenment philosophers turned to a few of their scientific predecessors – ], ], ], and Newton principally – as the guides to every physical and social field of the day.<ref>{{Cite web |title=The Scientific Revolution and the Enlightenment (1500–1780) |url=https://www.tamaqua.k12.pa.us/cms/lib07/PA01000119/Centricity/Domain/119/TheScientificRevolution.pdf |access-date=29 January 2024 |archive-date=14 January 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240114191547/https://www.tamaqua.k12.pa.us/cms/lib07/PA01000119/Centricity/Domain/119/TheScientificRevolution.pdf |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite encyclopedia |title=Scientific Revolution |url=https://www.britannica.com/science/Scientific-Revolution |access-date=29 January 2024 |encyclopedia=Encyclopædia Britannica |archive-date=18 May 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190518105004/https://www.britannica.com/science/Scientific-Revolution |url-status=live}}</ref> | |||
{{Main|Scientific community}} | |||
The 18th century saw significant advancements in the practice of medicine<ref>{{cite book |title=Brock Biology of Microorganisms |publisher=Prentice Hall |year=2006 |isbn=978-0131443297 |editor-last=Madigan |editor-first=M. |editor-last2=Martinko |editor-first2=J. |edition=11th}}</ref> and physics;<ref>{{cite book |last=Guicciardini |first=N. |url=https://archive.org/details/readingprincipia0000guic |title=Reading the Principia: The Debate on Newton's Methods for Natural Philosophy from 1687 to 1736 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=1999 |isbn=978-0521640664 |location=New York |url-access=registration}}</ref> the development of biological ] by ];<ref>{{cite journal |author1-link=Charles Calisher |last1=Calisher |first1=CH |year=2007 |title=Taxonomy: what's in a name? Doesn't a rose by any other name smell as sweet? |journal=Croatian Medical Journal |volume=48 |issue=2 |pages=268–270 |pmc=2080517 |pmid=17436393}}</ref> a new understanding of ] and electricity;<ref>{{cite book |last1=Darrigol |first1=Olivier |url=https://archive.org/details/electrodynamicsf0000darr |title=Electrodynamics from Ampère to Einstein |year=2000 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=0198505949 |location=New York |url-access=registration}}</ref> and the maturation of ] as a discipline.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Olby |first1=R. C. |last2=Cantor |first2=G. N. |last3=Christie |first3=J. R. R. |last4=Hodge |first4=M. J. S. |year=1990 |title=Companion to the History of Modern Science |location=London |publisher=Routledge |page=265}}</ref> Ideas on human nature, society, and economics evolved during the Enlightenment. Hume and other Scottish Enlightenment thinkers developed '']'', which was expressed historically in works by authors including ], ], ] and ], all of whom merged a scientific study of how humans behaved in ancient and primitive cultures with a strong awareness of the determining forces of ].<ref>{{Cite web |last=Magnusson |first=Magnus |date=10 November 2003 |title=Review of James Buchan, ''Capital of the Mind: how Edinburgh Changed the World'' |url=http://www.newstatesman.com/200311100040 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110606015918/http://www.newstatesman.com/200311100040 |archive-date=6 June 2011 |access-date=27 April 2014 |work=New Statesman}}</ref> Modern sociology largely originated from this movement.<ref>{{Cite journal |jstor=588406 |title=Origins of Sociology: The Case of the Scottish Enlightenment |journal=The British Journal of Sociology |volume=21 |issue=2 |pages=164–180 |last1=Swingewood |first1=Alan |year=1970}}</ref> In 1776, ] published '']'', which is often considered the first work on modern economics.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Fry |first=Michael |url=https://archive.org/details/adamsmithslegacy0000unse |title=Adam Smith's Legacy: His Place in the Development of Modern Economics |publisher=] |others=], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ] |year=1992 |isbn=978-0-415-06164-3 |url-access=registration}}</ref> | |||
The scientific community consists of the total body of scientists, its relationships and interactions. It is normally divided into "sub-communities" each working on a particular field within science. | |||
=== |
=== 19th century === | ||
{{Main|19th century in science}}] made by ] in 1837|alt=Sketch of a map with captions]] | |||
{{Main|Fields of science}} | |||
During the 19th century, many distinguishing characteristics of contemporary modern science began to take shape. These included the transformation of the life and physical sciences; the frequent use of precision instruments; the emergence of terms such as "biologist", "physicist", and "scientist"; an increased professionalisation of those studying nature; scientists gaining cultural authority over many dimensions of society; the industrialisation of numerous countries; the thriving of popular science writings; and the emergence of science journals.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Lightman |first1=Bernard |editor1-last=Shank |editor1-first=Michael |editor2-last=Numbers |editor2-first=Ronald |editor3-last=Harrison |editor3-first=Peter |title=Wrestling with Nature: From Omens to Science |year=2011 |publisher=University of Chicago Press |isbn=978-0-226-31783-0 |page=367 |chapter=13. Science and the Public}}</ref> During the late 19th century, psychology emerged as a separate discipline from philosophy when ] founded the first laboratory for psychological research in 1879.<ref>{{cite book |last=Leahey |first=Thomas Hardy |title=A History of Psychology: From Antiquity to Modernity |year=2018 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-138-65242-2 |edition=8th |location=New York |pages=219–253 |chapter=The psychology of consciousness}}</ref> | |||
<!-- The organizational tables have been moved to the main article "Fields of science" --> | |||
Fields of science are widely recognized categories of specialized expertise, and typically embody their own ] and ]. Each field will commonly be represented by one or more ], where ] research will be published. | |||
During the mid-19th century ] and ] independently proposed the theory of evolution by ] in 1858, which explained how different plants and animals originated and evolved. Their theory was set out in detail in Darwin's book '']'', published in 1859.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Padian |first=Kevin |title=Darwin's enduring legacy |journal=Nature |volume=451 |issue=7179 |pages=632–634 |year=2008 |doi=10.1038/451632a |pmid=18256649 |bibcode=2008Natur.451..632P |doi-access=free}}</ref> Separately, ] presented his paper, "]" in 1865,<ref>{{Cite book |last=Henig |first=Robin Marantz |author-link=Robin Marantz Henig |url=https://archive.org/details/monkingardenlost00heni |title=The monk in the garden: the lost and found genius of Gregor Mendel, the father of genetics |year=2000 |pages=134–138}}</ref> which outlined the principles of biological inheritance, serving as the basis for modern genetics.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Miko |first=Ilona |title=Gregor Mendel's principles of inheritance form the cornerstone of modern genetics. So just what are they? |journal=Nature Education |volume=1 |issue=1 |page=134 |year=2008 |url=https://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/gregor-mendel-and-the-principles-of-inheritance-593/ |access-date=9 May 2021 |archive-date=19 July 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190719224056/http://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/gregor-mendel-and-the-principles-of-inheritance-593 |url-status=live}}</ref> | |||
===Institutions=== | |||
] visiting the {{lang|fr|]}} in 1671]] | |||
] for the communication and promotion of scientific thought and experimentation have existed since the ] period.<ref>{{Cite web| last=Parrott | first=Jim | date=August 9, 2007 | url=http://www.scholarly-societies.org/1599andearlier.html | title=Chronicle for Societies Founded from 1323 to 1599 | publisher=Scholarly Societies Project | accessdate=2007-09-11}}</ref> The oldest surviving institution is the {{lang|it|'']''}} in ].<ref>{{Cite web| year=2006 | url=http://positivamente.lincei.it/ | title=Benvenuto nel sito dell'Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei | language=Italian | publisher=Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei | accessdate=2007-09-11}}</ref> The respective National ] are distinguished institutions that exist in a number of countries, beginning with the British ] in 1660<ref>{{Cite web| url=http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/page.asp?id=2176 | title=Brief history of the Society | publisher=The Royal Society | accessdate=2007-09-11}}</ref> and the French {{lang|fr|'']''}} in 1666.<ref>{{Cite web| first=G.G. | last=Meynell | url=http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/page.asp?id=2176 | title=The French Academy of Sciences, 1666–91: A reassessment of the French Académie royale des sciences under Colbert (1666–83) and Louvois (1683–91) | publisher=Topics in Scientific & Medical History | accessdate=2007-09-11}}</ref> | |||
Early in the 19th century ] suggested the modern ], based on Democritus's original idea of indivisible particles called ''atoms''.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Rocke |first1=Alan J. |year=2005 |title=In Search of El Dorado: John Dalton and the Origins of the Atomic Theory |journal=Social Research |volume=72 |issue=1 |pages=125–158 |doi=10.1353/sor.2005.0003 |jstor=40972005 |s2cid=141350239}}</ref> The laws of ], ] and ] suggested a highly stable universe where there could be little loss of resources. However, with the advent of the ] and the ] there was an increased understanding that not all forms of energy have the same ], the ease of conversion to useful ] or to another form of energy.<ref name="Reichl1980" /> This realisation led to the development of the laws of ], in which the free energy of the universe is seen as constantly declining: the ] of a closed universe increases over time.{{efn|name= HelmholtzGibbsGuthLinde|1= Whether the universe is closed or open, or the ], is an open question. The 2nd law of thermodynamics,<ref name="Reichl1980" >{{cite book |last=Reichl |first=Linda |author-link=Linda Reichl |year=1980 |title=A Modern Course in Statistical Physics |url= |location= |publisher=Edward Arnold |isbn=0-7131-2789-9}}</ref>{{rp|9}}<ref>{{cite book |last=Rao |first=Y. V. C. |title=Chemical Engineering Thermodynamics |publisher=Universities Press |isbn=978-81-7371-048-3 |year=1997 |page=158}}</ref> and the 3rd law of thermodynamics<ref>{{cite journal |doi=10.1016/j.aop.2016.07.031 |title=Bounded energy exchange as an alternative to the third law of thermodynamics |year=2016 |last1=Heidrich |first1=M. |journal=Annals of Physics |volume=373 |pages=665–681 |bibcode=2016AnPhy.373..665H}}</ref> imply the ] if the universe is a closed system, but not necessarily for an expanding universe.}} | |||
International scientific organizations, such as the ], have since been formed to promote cooperation between the scientific communities of different nations. More recently, influential government agencies have been created to support scientific research, including the ] in the ] | |||
The ] was established in the 19th century by the works of ], ], ], ], ], and ]. The new theory raised questions that could not easily be answered using Newton's framework. The discovery of ]s inspired the discovery of ] by ] and ] in 1896,<ref>{{cite book |last=Mould |first=Richard F. |title=A century of X-rays and radioactivity in medicine: with emphasis on photographic records of the early years |year=1995 |publisher=Inst. of Physics Publ. |isbn=978-0-7503-0224-1 |edition=Reprint. with minor corr |location=Bristol |page=12}}</ref> Marie Curie then became the first person to win two ]s.<ref name="Estreicher1938">{{cite book |last=Estreicher |first=Tadeusz |title=Polski słownik biograficzny, vol. 4 |title-link=Polski słownik biograficzny |year=1938 |page=113 |language=pl |chapter=Curie, Maria ze Skłodowskich |author-link=Tadeusz Estreicher}}</ref> In the next year came the discovery of the first subatomic particle, the ].<ref>{{cite journal |last=Thomson |first=J. J. |year=1897 |title=Cathode Rays |journal=] |volume=44 |issue=269 |pages=293–316 |doi=10.1080/14786449708621070}}</ref> | |||
Other prominent organizations include the ] in Argentina, the ] of many nations, ] in Australia, {{lang|fr|]}} in France, ] and {{lang|de|]}} in Germany, and in Spain, ]. | |||
=== |
=== 20th century === | ||
{{Main| |
{{Main|20th century in science}} | ||
] made in 1987 using data from a space telescope]] | |||
In the first half of the century the development of ] and ]s improved human living standards globally.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Goyotte |first=Dolores |year=2017 |title=The Surgical Legacy of World War II. Part II: The age of antibiotics |url=https://www.ast.org/ceonline/articles/402/files/assets/common/downloads/publication.pdf |url-status=live |journal=The Surgical Technologist |volume=109 |pages=257–264 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210505180530/https://www.ast.org/ceonline/articles/402/files/assets/common/downloads/publication.pdf |archive-date=5 May 2021 |access-date=8 January 2021}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Erisman |first1=Jan Willem |first2=M. A. |last2=Sutton |first3=J. |last3=Galloway |first4=Z. |last4=Klimont |first5=W. |last5=Winiwarter |date=October 2008 |title=How a century of ammonia synthesis changed the world |url=http://www.physics.ohio-state.edu/~wilkins/energy/Resources/Essays/ngeo325.pdf.xpdf |url-status=dead |journal=] |volume=1 |issue=10 |pages=636–639 |bibcode=2008NatGe...1..636E |doi=10.1038/ngeo325 |s2cid=94880859 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100723223052/http://www.physics.ohio-state.edu/~wilkins/energy/Resources/Essays/ngeo325.pdf.xpdf |archive-date=23 July 2010 |access-date=22 October 2010}}</ref> Harmful ] such as ], ], ], and ] came to the public's attention and caused the onset of ].<ref>{{cite journal |editor-last1=Emmett |editor-first1=Rob |editor-last2=Zelko |editor-first2=Frank |url=http://www.environmentandsociety.org/perspectives/2014/2/minding-gap-working-across-disciplines-environmental-studies |title=Minding the Gap: Working Across Disciplines in Environmental Studies |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220121054306/https://www.environmentandsociety.org/perspectives/2014/2/minding-gap-working-across-disciplines-environmental-studies |archive-date=21 January 2022 |series=RCC Perspectives no. 2 |year=2014 |doi=10.5282/rcc/6313 |last1=Emmett |first1=Robert |last2=Zelko |first2=Frank |journal=Environment & Society Portal}}</ref> | |||
During this period scientific experimentation became increasingly ].<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Furner |first=Jonathan |date=1 June 2003 |title=Little Book, Big Book: Before and After Little Science, Big Science: A Review Article, Part I |journal=Journal of Librarianship and Information Science |volume=35 |issue=2 |pages=115–125 |doi=10.1177/0961000603352006 |s2cid=34844169}}</ref> The extensive technological innovation stimulated by ], ], and the ] led to competitions between ], such as the ] and ].<ref>{{cite book |last=Kraft |first=Chris |url=https://archive.org/details/flight00chri |title=Flight: My Life in Mission Control |first2=James |last2=Schefter |publisher=Dutton |year=2001 |isbn=0-525-94571-7 |location=New York |author-link=Christopher C. Kraft, Jr. |pages=3–5}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Kahn |first=Herman |author-link=Herman Kahn |year=1962 |title=Thinking about the Unthinkable |publisher=Horizon}}</ref> Substantial international collaborations were also made, despite armed conflicts.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Shrum |first=Wesley |title=Structures of scientific collaboration |year=2007 |publisher=MIT Press |others=Joel Genuth, Ivan Chompalov |isbn=978-0-262-28358-8 |location=Cambridge, MA}}</ref> | |||
An enormous range of ] is published.<ref>{{Cite journal | |||
| last=Ziman | first=Bhadriraju | |||
| journal=Science | |||
| title=The proliferation of scientific literature: a natural process | |||
| year=1980 | volume=208 | issue=4442 | |||
| pages=369–371 | |||
| doi= 10.1126/science.7367863 | |||
| pmid=7367863 | |||
| ref=harv }}</ref> ]s communicate and document the results of research carried out in universities and various other research institutions, serving as an archival record of science. The first scientific journals, '']'' followed by the '']'', began publication in 1665. Since that time the total number of active periodicals has steadily increased. As of 1981, one estimate for the number of scientific and technical journals in publication was 11,500.<ref>{{Cite book | |||
| first=Krishna | last=Subramanyam | |||
| coauthors=Subramanyam, Bhadriraju | year=1981 | |||
| title=Scientific and Technical Information Resources | |||
| publisher=CRC Press | isbn=0824782976 | |||
| oclc=232950234 }}</ref> Today ] lists almost 40,000, related to the medical sciences only.<ref></ref> | |||
In the late 20th century active recruitment of women and elimination of ] greatly increased the number of women scientists, but large gender disparities remained in some fields.<ref>{{cite book |last=Rosser |first=Sue V. |title=Breaking into the Lab: Engineering Progress for Women in Science |date=12 March 2012 |publisher=New York University Press |isbn=978-0-8147-7645-2 |page=7}}</ref> The discovery of the ] in 1964<ref>{{cite journal |last=Penzias |first=A. A. |year=2006 |title=The origin of elements |url=http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1978/penzias-lecture.pdf |journal=Science |publisher=] |volume=205 |issue=4406 |pages=549–554 |doi=10.1126/science.205.4406.549 |pmid=17729659 |access-date=4 October 2006 |archive-date=17 January 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110117225210/http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1978/penzias-lecture.pdf |url-status=live}}</ref> led to a rejection of the ] in favour of the ] theory of ].<ref>{{cite book |last=Weinberg |first=S. |url=https://archive.org/details/gravitationcosmo00stev_0/page/495 |title=Gravitation and Cosmology |publisher=John Whitney & Sons |year=1972 |isbn=978-0-471-92567-5 |pages= |url-access=registration}}</ref> | |||
Most scientific journals cover a single scientific field and publish the research within that field; the research is normally expressed in the form of a ]. Science has become so pervasive in modern societies that it is generally considered necessary to communicate the achievements, news, and ambitions of scientists to a wider populace. | |||
The century saw fundamental changes within science disciplines. Evolution became a unified theory in the early 20th-century when the ] reconciled Darwinian evolution with ].<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Futuyma |first1=Douglas J. |title=Evolution |last2=Kirkpatrick |first2=Mark |year=2017 |isbn=978-1605356051 |edition=4th |pages=3–26 |chapter=Chapter 1: Evolutionary Biology |publisher=Sinauer}}</ref> ]'s ] and the development of ] complement classical mechanics to describe physics in extreme ], time and ].<ref>{{Cite book |last=Miller |first=Arthur I. |title=Albert Einstein's special theory of relativity. Emergence (1905) and early interpretation (1905–1911) |year=1981 |location=Reading |publisher=Addison–Wesley |isbn=978-0-201-04679-3}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=ter Haar |first=D. |url=https://archive.org/details/oldquantumtheory0000haar |title=The Old Quantum Theory |publisher=Pergamon |year=1967 |isbn=978-0-08-012101-7 |pages= |url-access=registration}}</ref> Widespread use of ]s in the last quarter of the 20th century combined with ]s led to a revolution in information technology and the rise of the global internet and ], including ]s. The need for mass systematisation of long, intertwined causal chains and large amounts of data led to the rise of the fields of ] and computer-assisted ].<ref>{{cite journal |last1=von Bertalanffy |first1=Ludwig |year=1972 |title=The History and Status of General Systems Theory |journal=The Academy of Management Journal |volume=15 |issue=4 |pages=407–426 |jstor=255139}}</ref> | |||
]s such as ], ] and ] cater to the needs of a much wider readership and provide a non-technical summary of popular areas of research, including notable discoveries and advances in certain fields of research. ]s engage the interest of many more people. Tangentially, the ] genre, primarily fantastic in nature, engages the public imagination and transmits the ideas, if not the methods, of science. | |||
=== 21st century === | |||
Recent efforts to intensify or develop links between science and non-scientific disciplines such as ] or, more specifically, ], include the ''Creative Writing Science'' resource developed through the ].<ref>{{Cite web| first=Mario | last=Petrucci | |||
{{Main|21st century#Science and technology}} | |||
| url=http://writeideas.org.uk/creativescience/index.htm | title=Creative Writing <-> Science | |||
] made by separate teams in the ] collaboration.]] | |||
| accessdate=2008-04-27 }}</ref> | |||
The ] was completed in 2003 by identifying and mapping all of the genes of the ].<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Naidoo |first1=Nasheen |last2=Pawitan |first2=Yudi |last3=Soong |first3=Richie |last4=Cooper |first4=David N. |last5=Ku |first5=Chee-Seng |date=October 2011 |title=Human genetics and genomics a decade after the release of the draft sequence of the human genome |journal=Human Genomics |volume=5 |issue=6 |pages=577–622 |doi=10.1186/1479-7364-5-6-577 |pmc=3525251 |pmid=22155605 |doi-access=free}}</ref> The first ]s were made in 2006, allowing adult cells to be transformed into ]s and turn into any cell type found in the body.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Rashid |first1=S. Tamir |last2=Alexander |first2=Graeme J. M. |date=March 2013 |title=Induced pluripotent stem cells: from Nobel Prizes to clinical applications |journal=Journal of Hepatology |volume=58 |issue=3 |pages=625–629 |doi=10.1016/j.jhep.2012.10.026 |issn=1600-0641 |pmid=23131523 |doi-access=free}}</ref> With the affirmation of the ] discovery in 2013, the last particle predicted by the ] of particle physics was found.<ref>{{cite press release |last=O'Luanaigh |first=C. |date=14 March 2013 |title=New results indicate that new particle is a Higgs boson |publisher=] |url=http://home.web.cern.ch/about/updates/2013/03/new-results-indicate-new-particle-higgs-boson |access-date=9 October 2013 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151020000722/http://home.web.cern.ch/about/updates/2013/03/new-results-indicate-new-particle-higgs-boson |archive-date=20 October 2015}}</ref> In 2015, ]s, predicted by ] a century before, were ].<ref>{{Cite journal |doi=10.3847/2041-8213/aa91c9 |title=Multi-messenger Observations of a Binary Neutron Star Merger |journal=The Astrophysical Journal |volume=848 |issue=2 |page=L12 |year=2017 |last1=Abbott |first1=B. P. |last2=Abbott |first2=R. |last3=Abbott |first3=T. D. |last4=Acernese |first4=F. |last5=Ackley |first5=K. |last6=Adams |first6=C. |last7=Adams |first7=T. |last8=Addesso |first8=P. |last9=Adhikari |first9=R. X.|last10 = Adya|first10 = V. B. |last11=Affeldt |first11=C. |last12=Afrough |first12=M. |last13=Agarwal |first13=B. |last14=Agathos |first14=M. |last15=Agatsuma |first15=K. |last16=Aggarwal |first16=N. |last17=Aguiar |first17=O. D. |last18=Aiello |first18=L. |last19=Ain |first19=A.|last20 = Ajith|first20 = P. |last21=Allen |first21=B. |last22=Allen |first22=G. |last23=Allocca |first23=A. |last24=Altin |first24=P. A. |last25=Amato |first25=A. |last26=Ananyeva |first26=A. |last27=Anderson |first27=S. B. |last28=Anderson |first28=W. G. |last29=Angelova |first29=S. V.|last30 = Antier|first30 = S. |display-authors=29 |bibcode=2017ApJ...848L..12A |arxiv=1710.05833 |s2cid=217162243 |doi-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |doi=10.1126/science.aar2149 |title=Merging neutron stars generate gravitational waves and a celestial light show |journal=Science |year=2017 |last1=Cho |first1=Adrian}}</ref> In 2019, the international collaboration ] presented the first direct image of a ]'s ].<ref>{{Cite web |date=20 April 2019 |title=Media Advisory: First Results from the Event Horizon Telescope to be Presented on April 10th |publisher=Event Horizon Telescope |url=https://eventhorizontelescope.org/blog/media-advisory-first-results-event-horizon-telescope-be-presented-april-10th |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190420135254/https://eventhorizontelescope.org/blog/media-advisory-first-results-event-horizon-telescope-be-presented-april-10th |archive-date=20 April 2019 |access-date=21 September 2021}}</ref><!-- Should be one paragraph until ~2040, as it represents a quarter of the century --> | |||
==Branches== | |||
=== Women in science === | |||
{{Main| |
{{Main|Branches of science}} | ||
Modern science is commonly divided into three major ]es: ], ], and ].<ref name="Cohen2021"/> Each of these branches comprises various specialised yet overlapping scientific disciplines that often possess their own ] and expertise.<ref>{{cite magazine |url=http://seedmagazine.com/content/article/scientific_method_relationships_among_scientific_paradigms/ |title=Scientific Method: Relationships Among Scientific Paradigms |date=7 March 2007 |magazine=Seed Magazine |access-date=4 November 2016 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161101001155/http://seedmagazine.com/content/article/scientific_method_relationships_among_scientific_paradigms/ |archive-date=1 November 2016}}</ref> Both natural and social sciences are ]s,<ref>{{cite book |title=Philosophy of Science: From Problem to Theory |last=Bunge |first=Mario Augusto |year=1998 |publisher=Transaction |isbn=978-0-7658-0413-6 |page=24}}</ref> as their knowledge is based on ] and is capable of being tested for its validity by other researchers working under the same conditions.<ref name="Popper2002">{{cite book |last=Popper |first=Karl R. |year=2002a |chapter=A survey of some fundamental problems |title=The Logic of Scientific Discovery |url=https://archive.org/details/logicscientificd00popp_574 |url-access=limited |orig-date=1959 |pages=–26 |publisher=Routledge |location=New York |isbn=978-0-415-27844-7}}</ref> | |||
] | |||
Science is, in general, a male-dominated field. Evidence suggests that this is due to stereotypes (e.g. science as "manly") as well as ].<ref>Summers, L. H. (2005). Remarks at NBER Conference on Diversifying the Science & Engineering Workforce. The office of the President. Harvard University.</ref><ref>Nosek, B.A., et al. (2009). National differences in gender–science stereotypes predict national sex differences in science and math achievement. PNAS, June 30, 2009, 106, 10593–10597.</ref> Experiments have shown that parents challenge and explain more to boys than girls, asking them to reflect more deeply and logically.<ref>Crowley, K. Callanan, M.A., Tenenbaum, H. R., & Allen, E. (2001). Parents explain more often to boys than to girls during shared scientific thinking. Psychological Science, 258–261.</ref> Physicist ] argues that science may suffer for its manly stereotypes when ego and competitiveness obstruct progress, since these tendencies prevent collaboration and sharing of information.<ref>Reflections on Gender and Science. Yale University Press, 1985.</ref> | |||
== |
=== Natural science === | ||
] is the study of the physical world. It can be divided into two main branches: ] and ]. These two branches may be further divided into more specialised disciplines. For example, physical science can be subdivided into physics, ], ], and ]. Modern natural science is the successor to the ] that began in ]. ], ], ], and ] debated the benefits of using approaches that were more ] and more experimental in a methodical way. Still, philosophical perspectives, ]s, and ]s, often overlooked, remain necessary in natural science.<ref>{{cite book |last=Gauch |first=Hugh G. Jr. |chapter=Science in perspective |title=Scientific Method in Practice |publisher=Cambridge University Press |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=iVkugqNG9dAC&pg=PA71 |pages=21–73 |isbn=978-0-521-01708-4 |year=2003 |access-date=3 September 2018}}</ref> Systematic data collection, including ], succeeded ], which emerged in the 16th century by describing and classifying plants, animals, minerals, and other biotic beings.<ref>{{cite book |last=Oglivie |first=Brian W. |year=2008 |chapter=Introduction |title=The Science of Describing: Natural History in Renaissance Europe |pages=1–24 |edition=Paperback |publisher=University of Chicago Press |isbn=978-0-226-62088-6}}</ref> Today, "natural history" suggests observational descriptions aimed at popular audiences.<ref>{{cite dictionary |title=Natural History |url=http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=natural+history |dictionary=Princeton University WordNet |access-date=21 October 2012 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120303173506/http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=natural+history |archive-date=3 March 2012}}</ref> | |||
{{Main|Philosophy of science}} | |||
] | |||
Philosophy of science seeks to understand the nature and justification of scientific knowledge. Since it is difficult to distinguish science from non-science, there are legitimate arguments about the boundaries between science and non-science. This is known as the ]. There is however, a set of core precepts that have broad consensus among philosophers of science and within the ] on what constitutes scientific knowledge. For example, it is generally agreed that scientific hypotheses and theories must be capable of being independently tested and verified by other scientists in order to become accepted by the scientific community.{{Citation needed|date=May 2011}} | |||
=== Social science === | |||
There are different schools of thought in philosophy of science. The most popular position is ], which claims that knowledge is created by a process involving observation and that scientific theories are the result of generalizations from such observations.{{Citation needed|date=May 2011}} Empiricism generally encompasses ], a position that tries to explain the way general theories can be justified by the finite number of observations humans can make and the hence finite amount of empirical evidence available to confirm scientific theories. This is necessary because the number of predictions those theories make is infinite, which means that they cannot be known from the finite amount of evidence using ] logic only. Many versions of empiricism exist, with the predominant ones being ] and the ].{{Citation needed|date=May 2011}} | |||
] curve in economics, crossing over at the optimal equilibrium|alt=Two curve crossing over at a point, forming a X shape]] | |||
] is the study of human behaviour and the functioning of societies.<ref name="Colander2019"/><ref name="Nisbet2020"/> It has many disciplines that include, but are not limited to ], economics, history, ], ], psychology, and sociology.<ref name="Colander2019" /> In the social sciences, there are many competing theoretical perspectives, many of which are extended through competing ]s such as the ], ], and ] in sociology.<ref name="Colander2019" /> Due to the limitations of conducting controlled experiments involving large groups of individuals or complex situations, social scientists may adopt other research methods such as the ], ], and ]. Moreover, if quantitative information is available, social scientists may rely on statistical approaches to better understand social relationships and processes.<ref name="Colander2019" /> | |||
=== Formal science === | |||
Empiricism has stood in contrast to ], the position originally associated with ], which holds that knowledge is created by the human intellect, not by observation.{{Citation needed|date=May 2011}} A significant twentieth century version of rationalism is ], first defined by Austrian-British philosopher ]. Popper rejected the way that empiricism describes the connection between theory and observation. He claimed that theories are not generated by observation, but that observation is made in the light of theories and that the only way a theory can be affected by observation is when it comes in conflict with it.{{Citation needed|date=May 2011}} Popper proposed ] as the landmark of scientific theories, and ] as the empirical method to replace verifiability and induction by purely deductive notions.{{Citation needed|date=May 2011}} Popper further claimed that there is only one universal method in science, and that this method is not specific to science: The negative method of criticism, ]. It covers all products of the human mind, including science, mathematics, philosophy, and art <ref>Karl Popper: ''Objective Knowledge'' (1972)</ref> | |||
] is an area of study that generates knowledge using ]s.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://my.wlu.edu/the-sciences-at-wandl/formal-sciences |title=Formal Sciences: Washington and Lee University |website=Washington and Lee University |access-date=14 May 2021 |quote=A "formal science" is an area of study that uses formal systems to generate knowledge such as in Mathematics and Computer Science. Formal sciences are important subjects because all of quantitative science depends on them. |archive-date=14 May 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210514125428/https://my.wlu.edu/the-sciences-at-wandl/formal-sciences |url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="Löwe2002"/><ref name="Rucker2019"/> A formal system is an ] used for inferring ]s from ]s according to a set of rules.<ref>{{Cite encyclopedia |title=Formal system |url=https://www.britannica.com/topic/formal-system |access-date=30 May 2022 |encyclopedia=Encyclopædia Britannica |archive-date=29 April 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080429174130/http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9034889/formal-system |url-status=live}}</ref> It includes mathematics,<ref>{{cite book |last=Tomalin |first=Marcus |year=2006 |title=Linguistics and the Formal Sciences}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |title=The Formal Sciences: Their Scope, Their Foundations, and Their Unity |journal=Synthese |volume=133 |pages=5–11 |doi=10.1023/a:1020887832028 |year=2002 |last1=Löwe |first1=Benedikt |issue=1/2 |s2cid=9272212}}</ref> ], and ]. The formal sciences share similarities with the other two branches by relying on objective, careful, and systematic study of an area of knowledge. They are, however, different from the empirical sciences as they rely exclusively on deductive reasoning, without the need for empirical evidence, to verify their abstract concepts.<ref name="Fetzer2013"/><ref>{{cite book |first=Thompson |last=Bill |title=The Nature of Statistical Evidence |chapter=2.4 Formal Science and Applied Mathematics |publisher=Springer |series=Lecture Notes in Statistics |volume=189 |year=2007 |page=15}}</ref><ref name="Popper2002" /> The formal sciences are therefore '']'' disciplines and because of this, there is disagreement on whether they constitute a science.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Bishop |first1=Alan |title=Mathematical Enculturation: A Cultural Perspective on Mathematics Education |publisher=Kluwer |year=1991 |isbn=978-0-7923-1270-3 |location=Norwell, MA |pages=20–59 |chapter=Environmental activities and mathematical culture |access-date=24 March 2018 |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=9AgrBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA54}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Bunge |first1=Mario |title=Philosophy of Science: Volume 1, From Problem to Theory |year=1998 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-0-7658-0413-6 |edition=revised |volume=1 |location=New York |pages=3–50 |chapter=The Scientific Approach}}</ref> Nevertheless, the formal sciences play an important role in the empirical sciences. ], for example, was initially invented to understand ] in physics.<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Mujumdar |first1=Anshu Gupta |last2=Singh |first2=Tejinder |year=2016 |chapter=Cognitive science and the connection between physics and mathematics |title=Trick or Truth?: The Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics |editor-first1=Anthony |editor-last1=Aguirre |editor-first2=Brendan |editor-last2=Foster |series=The Frontiers Collection |pages=201–218 |location=Switzerland |publisher=Springer |isbn=978-3-319-27494-2}}</ref> Natural and social sciences that rely heavily on mathematical applications include ],<ref>{{cite web |title=About the Journal |url=http://jmp.aip.org/jmp/staff.jsp |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061003233339/http://jmp.aip.org/jmp/staff.jsp |archive-date=3 October 2006 |access-date=3 October 2006 |website=]}}</ref> ],<ref>{{cite book |last=Restrepo |first=G. |chapter=Mathematical chemistry, a new discipline |title=Essays in the philosophy of chemistry |editor-last1=Scerri |editor-first1=E. |editor-last2=Fisher |editor-first2=G. |publisher=Oxford University Press |location=New York |year=2016 |pages=332–351 |isbn=978-0-19-049459-9 |url=https://global.oup.com/academic/product/essays-in-the-philosophy-of-chemistry-9780190494599?cc=de&lang=en&}}</ref> ],<ref>{{Cite web |title=What is mathematical biology |publisher=Centre for Mathematical Biology, University of Bath |url=http://www.bath.ac.uk/cmb/mathBiology/ |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180923070442/http://www.bath.ac.uk/cmb/mathBiology/ |archive-date=23 September 2018 |access-date=7 June 2018}}</ref> ],<ref>{{cite magazine |last=Johnson |first=Tim |date=1 September 2009 |title=What is financial mathematics? |url=https://plus.maths.org/content/what-financial-mathematics |access-date=1 March 2021 |magazine=+Plus Magazine |archive-date=8 April 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220408231344/https://plus.maths.org/content/what-financial-mathematics |url-status=live}}</ref> and ].<ref>{{cite book |last=Varian |first=Hal |author-link=Hal Varian |year=1997 |chapter=What Use Is Economic Theory? |editor-last1=D'Autume |editor-first1=A. |editor-last2=Cartelier |editor-first2=J. |title=Is Economics Becoming a Hard Science? |publisher=Edward Elgar}} . {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060625062619/http://www.sims.berkeley.edu/~hal/Papers/theory.pdf |date=25 June 2006 }}. Retrieved 1 April 2008.</ref> | |||
=== Applied science === | |||
Another approach, ], colloquially termed "shut up and calculate", emphasizes the utility of theories as instruments for explaining and predicting phenomena.<ref>{{Cite book|title = The Rationality of Science | author = Newton-Smith, W. H. | location = London | publisher = Routledge | year = 1994 | page = 30|isbn = 0710009135}}</ref> It claims that scientific theories are black boxes with only their input (initial conditions) and output (predictions) being relevant. Consequences, notions and logical structure of the theories are claimed to be something that should simply be ignored and that scientists shouldn't make a fuss about (see ]). | |||
] is the use of the ] and knowledge to attain practical goals and includes a broad range of disciplines such as engineering and medicine.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Abraham |first=Reem Rachel |year=2004 |title=Clinically oriented physiology teaching: strategy for developing critical-thinking skills in undergraduate medical students |journal=Advances in Physiology Education |volume=28 |issue=3 |pages=102–104 |doi=10.1152/advan.00001.2004 |pmid=15319191 |s2cid=21610124}}</ref><ref name="Bunge1966" /> Engineering is the use of scientific principles to invent, design and build machines, structures and technologies.<ref>{{cite dictionary |url=https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/engineering |title=Engineering |dictionary=Cambridge Dictionary |publisher=Cambridge University Press |access-date=25 March 2021 |archive-date=19 August 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190819030859/https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/engineering |url-status=live}}</ref> Science may contribute to the development of new technologies.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Brooks |first=Harvey |date=1 September 1994 |title=The relationship between science and technology |url=https://www.belfercenter.org/sites/default/files/files/publication/sciencetechnology.pdf |journal=Research Policy |series=Special Issue in Honor of Nathan Rosenberg |volume=23 |issue=5 |pages=477–486 |doi=10.1016/0048-7333(94)01001-3 |issn=0048-7333 |access-date=14 October 2022 |archive-date=30 December 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221230224402/https://www.belfercenter.org/sites/default/files/files/publication/sciencetechnology.pdf |url-status=live}}</ref> Medicine is the practice of caring for patients by maintaining and restoring health through the ], ], and ] of injury or disease.<ref>{{cite book |last=Firth |first=John |title=Oxford textbook of medicine |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=2020 |isbn=978-0-19-874669-0 |chapter=Science in medicine: when, how, and what}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last=Saunders |first=J. |date=June 2000 |title=The practice of clinical medicine as an art and as a science |journal=Med Humanit |volume=26 |issue=1 |pages=18–22 |doi=10.1136/mh.26.1.18 |pmid=12484313 |doi-access=free |s2cid=73306806 |pmc=1071282}}</ref> The applied sciences are often contrasted with the ]s, which are focused on advancing scientific theories and laws that explain and predict events in the natural world.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Davis |first1=Bernard D. |date=March 2000 |title=Limited scope of science |journal=Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews |volume=64 |issue=1 |pages=1–12 |doi=10.1128/MMBR.64.1.1-12.2000 |pmc=98983 |pmid=10704471 |postscript=none}} & "Technology" in {{cite journal |first=Bernard |last=Davis |author-link1=Bernard Davis (biologist) |date=Mar 2000 |title=The scientist's world |journal=] |volume=64 |issue=1 |pages=1–12 |doi=10.1128/MMBR.64.1.1-12.2000 |pmc=98983 |pmid=10704471}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |first=James |last=McCormick |year=2001 |title=Scientific medicine—fact of fiction? The contribution of science to medicine |journal=Occasional Paper (Royal College of General Practitioners) |pages=3–6 |pmc=2560978 |pmid=19790950 |number=80}}</ref> | |||
] applies ] real-world situations, enabling a better understanding of scientific problems than formal mathematics alone can achieve. The use of ] and ] is becoming a central feature of computational contributions to science, for example in ], ]s, ]ing and various forms of prediction. However, machines alone rarely advance knowledge as they require human guidance and capacity to reason; and they can introduce bias against certain social groups or sometimes underperform against humans.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Breznau |first1=Nate |year=2022 |title=Integrating Computer Prediction Methods in Social Science: A Comment on Hofman et al. (2021) |journal=Social Science Computer Review |volume=40 |issue=3 |pages=844–853 |doi=10.1177/08944393211049776 |doi-access=free |s2cid=248334446 |url=https://osf.io/adxb3/download |access-date=16 August 2023 |archive-date=29 April 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240429040922/https://osf.io/adxb3/download |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Hofman |first1=Jake M. |last2=Watts |first2=Duncan J. |author2-link=Duncan J. Watts |last3=Athey |first3=Susan |author3-link=Susan Athey |last4=Garip |first4=Filiz |last5=Griffiths |first5=Thomas L. |author5-link=Tom Griffiths (cognitive scientist) |last6=Kleinberg |first6=Jon |author6-link=Jon Kleinberg |last7=Margetts |first7=Helen |author7-link=Helen Margetts |last8=Mullainathan |first8=Sendhil |author8-link=Sendhil Mullainathan |last9=Salganik |first9=Matthew J. |author9-link=Matthew J. Salganik |last10=Vazire |first10=Simine |author10-link=Simine Vazire |last11=Vespignani |first11=Alessandro |author11-link=Alessandro Vespignani |date=July 2021 |title=Integrating explanation and prediction in computational social science |url=https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03659-0 |url-status=live |journal=Nature |volume=595 |issue=7866 |pages=181–188 |bibcode=2021Natur.595..181H |doi=10.1038/s41586-021-03659-0 |issn=1476-4687 |pmid=34194044 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210925074416/https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03659-0 |archive-date=25 September 2021 |access-date=25 September 2021 |s2cid=235697917}}</ref> | |||
Finally, another approach often cited in debates of ] against controversial movements like ], is ]. Its main point is that a difference between natural and ] explanations should be made, and that science should be restricted methodologically to natural explanations.{{Citation needed|date=May 2011}} That the restriction is merely methodological (rather than ontological) means that science should not consider supernatural explanations itself, but should not claim them to be wrong either. Instead, supernatural explanations should be left a matter of personal belief outside the scope of science. Methodological naturalism maintains that proper science requires strict adherence to ] study and independent verification as a process for properly developing and evaluating explanations for ] phenomena.<ref>{{Cite journal|journal = The Review of Metaphysics|title = Casebeer, William D. Natural Ethical Facts: Evolution, Connectionism, and Moral Cognition|author = Brugger, E. Christian|volume = 58| issue = 2|year = 2004|ref = harv}}</ref> The absence of these standards, ], biased ] and other common ] are frequently cited by supporters of methodological naturalism as criteria for the dubious claims they criticize not to be true science. | |||
=== Interdisciplinary science === | |||
==Science policy== | |||
] involves the combination of two or more disciplines into one,<ref>{{cite journal |last=Nissani |first=M. |year=1995 |title=Fruits, Salads, and Smoothies: A Working definition of Interdisciplinarity |journal=The Journal of Educational Thought |volume=29 |issue=2 |pages=121–128 |jstor=23767672}}</ref> such as ], a combination of biology and computer science<ref>{{cite book |url=https://archive.org/details/digitalcodeoflif0000mood |title=Digital Code of Life: How Bioinformatics is Revolutionizing Science, Medicine, and Business |last=Moody |first=G. |year=2004 |isbn=978-0-471-32788-2 |url-access=registration |page=vii |publisher=John Wiley & Sons}}</ref> or ]s. The concept has existed since the ancient Greek period and it became popular again in the 20th century.<ref>{{cite book |last=Ausburg |first=Tanya |title=Becoming Interdisciplinary: An Introduction to Interdisciplinary Studies |publisher=Kendall/Hunt Publishing |year=2006 |edition=2nd |location=New York}}</ref> | |||
{{Main|Science policy|History of science policy|Funding of science}} | |||
== Scientific research == | |||
Science policy is an area of ] concerned with the policies that affect the conduct of the science and research enterprise, including ], often in pursuance of other national policy goals such as technological innovation to promote commercial product development, weapons development, health care and environmental monitoring. Science policy also refers to the act of applying scientific knowledge and consensus to the development of public policies. Science policy thus deals with the entire domain of issues that involve the natural sciences. Is accordance with ] being concerned about the well-being of its citizens, science policy's goal is to consider how science and technology can best serve the public. | |||
Scientific research can be labelled as either basic or applied research. ] is the search for knowledge and ] is the search for solutions to practical problems using this knowledge. Most understanding comes from basic research, though sometimes applied research targets specific practical problems. This leads to technological advances that were not previously imaginable.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://richarddawkins.net/articles/91 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120119113522/http://richarddawkins.net/articles/91 |archive-date=19 January 2012 |title=To Live at All Is Miracle Enough |first=Richard |last=Dawkins |publisher=RichardDawkins.net |date=10 May 2006 |access-date=5 February 2012}}</ref> | |||
=== Scientific method === | |||
] ] has influenced the funding of ] and science for thousands of years, dating at least from the time of the ], who inspired the study of logic during the period of the ], and the study of defensive fortifications during the ] in China. In ], governmental approval of ] in the seventeenth century recognized a ] which exists to this day. The professionalization of science, begun in the nineteenth century, was partly enabled by the creation of scientific organizations such as the ], the ], and State funding of universities of their respective nations. Public policy can directly affect the funding of ], intellectual infrastructure for industrial research, by providing tax incentives to those organizations who fund research. ], director of the office of scientific research and development for the United States government, the forerunner of the ], wrote in July 1945 that "Science is a proper concern of government" <ref></ref> | |||
]|alt=6 steps of the scientific method in a loop]] | |||
Scientific research involves using the ], which seeks to ] explain the events of ] in a ] way.<ref name="di Francia1976">{{cite book |last=di Francia |first=Giuliano Toraldo |chapter=The method of physics |title=The Investigation of the Physical World |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=1976 |pages=1–52 |isbn=978-0-521-29925-1 |quote=The amazing point is that for the first time since the discovery of mathematics, a method has been introduced, the results of which have an intersubjective value!}}</ref> Scientists usually take for granted a set of basic assumptions that are needed to justify the scientific method: there is an ] shared by all rational observers; this objective reality is governed by ]s; these laws were discovered by means of systematic ] and experimentation.<ref name="Heilbron2003"/> Mathematics is essential in the formation of ], ], and laws, because it is used extensively in quantitative modelling, observing, and collecting ].<ref>{{cite book |last=Popper |first=Karl R. |url=https://archive.org/details/logicscientificd00popp_574 |title=The Logic of Scientific Discovery |publisher=Routledge |year=2002e |isbn=978-0-415-27844-7 |location=New York |pages=–26 |chapter=The problem of the empirical basis |orig-date=1959 |url-access=limited}}</ref> Statistics is used to summarise and analyse data, which allows scientists to assess the reliability of experimental results.<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Diggle |first1=Peter J. |author-link=Peter Diggle |title=Statistics and Scientific Method: An Introduction for Students and Researchers |last2=Chetwynd |first2=Amanda G. |author2-link=Amanda Chetwynd |year=2011 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0199543182 |pages=1–2}}</ref> | |||
Science and technology research is often funded through a competitive process, in which potential research projects are evaluated and only the most promising receive funding. Such processes, which are run by government, corporations or foundations, allocate scarce funds. Total research funding in most ] is between 1.5% and 3% of ].<ref name="OECD2008">{{PDF||50.8 KB}}</ref> In the ], around two-thirds of ] in scientific and technical fields is carried out by industry, and 20% and 10% respectively by ] and government. The government funding proportion in certain industries is higher, and it dominates research in ] and ]. Similarly, with some exceptions (e.g. ]) government provides the bulk of the funds for ]. In commercial research and development, all but the most research-oriented corporations focus more heavily on near-term commercialisation possibilities rather than "]" ideas or technologies (such as ]). | |||
In the scientific method an explanatory ] or hypothesis is put forward as an explanation using ] and is expected to seek ] – fitting with other accepted facts related to an observation or scientific question.<ref>{{cite book |last=Wilson |first=Edward |title=Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge |publisher=Vintage |location=New York |year=1999 |isbn=978-0-679-76867-8}}</ref> This tentative explanation is used to make ] predictions, which are typically posted before being tested by experimentation. Disproof of a prediction is evidence of progress.<ref name="di Francia1976" />{{Rp|pages=4–5}}<ref>{{cite book |last=Fara |first=Patricia |author-link=Patricia Fara |year=2009 |chapter=Decisions |title=Science: A Four Thousand Year History |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-922689-4 |page= |chapter-url=https://archive.org/details/sciencefourthous00fara/page/306}}</ref> Experimentation is especially important in science to help establish ] to avoid the ], though in some sciences such as astronomy or geology, a predicted observation might be more appropriate.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Aldrich |first=John |journal=Statistical Science |volume=10 |year=1995 |pages=364–376 |title=Correlations Genuine and Spurious in Pearson and Yule |jstor=2246135 |doi=10.1214/ss/1177009870 |issue=4 |doi-access=free}}</ref> | |||
==Pseudoscience, fringe science, and junk science== | |||
{{Main| Pseudoscience|Fringe science|Junk science|Cargo cult science|Scientific misconduct}} | |||
{{unreferenced section|date=April 2011}} | |||
An area of study or speculation that masquerades as science in an attempt to claim a legitimacy that it would not otherwise be able to achieve is sometimes referred to as ], ], or "alternative science". Another term, ], is often used to describe scientific hypotheses or conclusions which, while perhaps legitimate in themselves, are believed to be used to support a position that is seen as not legitimately justified by the totality of evidence. Physicist ] coined the term "]" in reference to pursuits that have the formal trappings of science but lack "a principle of scientific thought that corresponds to a kind of utter honesty" that allows their results to be rigorously evaluated. Various types of commercial advertising, ranging from hype to fraud, may fall into these categories. | |||
When a hypothesis proves unsatisfactory it is modified or discarded. If the hypothesis survives testing, it may become adopted into the framework of a ], a ]ly ]ed, self-consistent model or framework for describing the behaviour of certain natural events. A theory typically describes the behaviour of much broader sets of observations than a hypothesis; commonly, a large number of hypotheses can be logically bound together by a single theory. Thus, a theory is a hypothesis explaining various other hypotheses. In that vein, theories are formulated according to most of the same scientific principles as hypotheses. Scientists may generate a ], an attempt to describe or depict an observation in terms of a logical, physical or mathematical representation, and to generate new hypotheses that can be tested by experimentation.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Nola |first1=Robert |last2=Irzik |first2=Gürol |year=2005 |title=Philosophy, science, education and culture |volume=28 |series=Science & technology education library |isbn=978-1-4020-3769-6 |publisher=Springer |pages=207–230}}</ref> | |||
There also can be an element of political or ideological bias on all sides of such debates. Sometimes, research may be characterized as "bad science", research that is well-intentioned but is seen as incorrect, obsolete, incomplete, or over-simplified expositions of scientific ideas. The term "]" refers to situations such as where researchers have intentionally misrepresented their published data or have purposely given credit for a discovery to the wrong person. | |||
While performing experiments to test hypotheses, scientists may have a preference for one outcome over another.<ref>{{cite web |last=van Gelder |first=Tim |year=1999 |url=http://www.philosophy.unimelb.edu.au/tgelder/papers/HeadsIWin.pdf |title="Heads I win, tails you lose": A Foray Into the Psychology of Philosophy |publisher=University of Melbourne |access-date=28 March 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080409054240/http://www.philosophy.unimelb.edu.au/tgelder/papers/HeadsIWin.pdf |archive-date=9 April 2008}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last=Pease |first=Craig |date=6 September 2006 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100619154617/http://law-and-science.net/Science4BLJ/Scientific_Method/Deliberate.bias/Text.htm |archive-date=19 June 2010 |title=Chapter 23. Deliberate bias: Conflict creates bad science |website=Science for Business, Law and Journalism |publisher=Vermont Law School |url=http://law-and-science.net/Science4BLJ/Scientific_Method/Deliberate.bias/Text.htm}}</ref> Eliminating the bias can be achieved through transparency, careful ], and a thorough ] process of the experimental results and conclusions.<ref>{{cite book |first=David |last=Shatz |year=2004 |title=Peer Review: A Critical Inquiry |publisher=Rowman & Littlefield |isbn=978-0-7425-1434-8}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |first=Sheldon |last=Krimsky |year=2003 |title=Science in the Private Interest: Has the Lure of Profits Corrupted the Virtue of Biomedical Research |publisher=Rowman & Littlefield |isbn=978-0-7425-1479-9 |url=https://archive.org/details/scienceinprivate0000krim}}</ref> After the results of an experiment are announced or published, it is normal practice for independent researchers to double-check how the research was performed, and to follow up by performing similar experiments to determine how dependable the results might be.<ref>{{cite book |first=Ruth Ellen |last=Bulger |year=2002 |last2=Heitman |first2=Elizabeth |last3=Reiser |first3=Stanley Joel |title=The Ethical Dimensions of the Biological and Health Sciences |edition=2nd |isbn=978-0-521-00886-0 |publisher=Cambridge University Press}}</ref> Taken in its entirety, the scientific method allows for highly creative problem solving while minimising the effects of subjective and ].<ref>{{cite web |last=Backer |first=Patricia Ryaby |date=29 October 2004 |url=http://www.engr.sjsu.edu/pabacker/scientific_method.htm |title=What is the scientific method? |publisher=San Jose State University |access-date=28 March 2008 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080408082917/http://www.engr.sjsu.edu/pabacker/scientific_method.htm |archive-date=8 April 2008}}</ref> ], the ability to reach a consensus and reproduce results, is fundamental to the creation of all scientific knowledge.<ref>{{cite book |last=Ziman |first=John |title=Reliable knowledge: An exploration of the grounds for belief in science |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=1978c |isbn=978-0-521-22087-3 |pages= |chapter=Common observation |chapter-url=https://archive.org/details/reliableknowledg00john/page/42}}</ref> | |||
==Critiques== | |||
{{Main|Criticism of science}} | |||
=== Scientific literature === | |||
===Philosophical critiques=== | |||
{{Main|Scientific literature|Lists of important publications in science}} | |||
Historian ] termed science "a faith as fanatical as any in history" and warned against the use of scientific thought to suppress considerations of meaning as integral to human existence.<ref>Jacques Barzun, ''Science: The Glorious Entertainment'', Harper and Row: 1964. p. 15. (quote) and Chapters II and XII.</ref> Many recent thinkers, such as ], ] and ] considered that the 17th century ] shifted science from a focus on understanding ], or wisdom, to a focus on manipulating nature, i.e. ], and that science's emphasis on manipulating nature leads it inevitably to manipulate people, as well.<ref name=UW>Fritjof Capra, ''Uncommon Wisdom'', ISBN 0-671-47322-0, p. 213</ref> Science's focus on quantitative measures has led to critiques that it is unable to recognize important qualitative aspects of the world.<ref name=UW/> | |||
]'', 4 November 1869|alt=Decorated "NATURE" as title, with scientific text below]] | |||
Scientific research is published in a range of literature.<ref>{{cite journal |author-link=John Ziman |last=Ziman |first=J. M. |journal=Science |title=The proliferation of scientific literature: a natural process |year=1980 |volume=208 |issue=4442 |pages=369–371 |doi=10.1126/science.7367863 |pmid=7367863 |bibcode=1980Sci...208..369Z}}</ref> ]s communicate and document the results of research carried out in universities and various other research institutions, serving as an archival record of science. The first scientific journals, {{lang|fr|]}} followed by '']'', began publication in 1665. Since that time the total number of active periodicals has steadily increased. In 1981, one estimate for the number of scientific and technical journals in publication was 11,500.<ref>{{cite book |first=Krishna |last=Subramanyam |last2=Subramanyam |first2=Bhadriraju |year=1981 |title=Scientific and Technical Information Resources |publisher=CRC Press |isbn=978-0-8247-8297-9}}</ref> | |||
Most scientific journals cover a single scientific field and publish the research within that field; the research is normally expressed in the form of a ]. Science has become so pervasive in modern societies that it is considered necessary to communicate the achievements, news, and ambitions of scientists to a wider population.<ref name="Bush1945">{{cite web |last=Bush |first=Vannevar |date=July 1945 |title=Science the Endless Frontier |url=https://www.nsf.gov/od/lpa/nsf50/vbush1945.htm |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161107221306/https://www.nsf.gov/od/lpa/nsf50/vbush1945.htm |archive-date=7 November 2016 |access-date=4 November 2016 |publisher=National Science Foundation}}</ref> | |||
Philosopher of science ] advanced the idea of ], which holds that there are no useful and exception-free ] governing the ] or the growth of ], and that the idea that science can or should operate according to universal and fixed rules is unrealistic, pernicious and detrimental to science itself.<ref name="contra">{{Cite book| last = Feyerabend | first = Paul |authorlink = Paul Feyerabend | title = Against Method | publisher = Verso | location = London | year = 1993 | isbn = 9780860916468 }}</ref> Feyerabend advocates treating science as an ] alongside others such as ], ] and ], and considers the dominance of science in society ] and unjustified.<ref name="contra"/> He also contended (along with ]) that the ] of distinguishing science from ] on objective grounds is not possible and thus fatal to the notion of science running according to fixed, universal rules.<ref name="contra"/> | |||
=== Challenges === | |||
Feyerabend also criticized science for not having evidence for its own philosophical precepts. Particularly the notion of Uniformity of Law and the Uniformity of Process across time and space. "We have to realize that a unified theory of the physical world simply does not exist" says Feyerabend, "We have theories that work in restricted regions, we have purely formal attempts to condense them into a single formula, we have lots of unfounded claims (such as the claim that all of chemistry can be reduced to physics), phenomena that do not fit into the accepted framework are suppressed; in physics, which many scientists regard as the one really basic science, we have now at least three different points of view...without a promise of conceptual (and not only formal) unification".<ref>{{Cite book| isbn = 0860911845 | title = Farewell To Reason| page = 100 | publisher = Verso | last = Feyerabend | first = Paul | year = 1987 | authorlink = Paul Feyerabend}}</ref> | |||
The ] is an ongoing ] crisis that affects parts of the ] and ]s. In subsequent investigations, the results of many scientific studies have been proven to be ].<ref>{{Cite journal |doi=10.1038/515009a |title=Metascience could rescue the 'replication crisis' |journal=Nature |volume=515 |issue=7525 |page=9 |year=2014 |last1=Schooler |first1=J. W. |pmid=25373639 |bibcode=2014Natur.515....9S |doi-access=free}}</ref> The crisis has long-standing roots; the phrase was coined in the early 2010s<ref>{{Cite journal |doi=10.1177/1745691612465253 |title=Editors' Introduction to the Special Section on Replicability in Psychological Science: A Crisis of Confidence? |journal=Perspectives on Psychological Science |volume=7 |issue=6 |pages=528–530 |year=2012 |last1=Pashler |first1=Harold |last2=Wagenmakers |first2=Eric Jan |pmid=26168108 |s2cid=26361121 |doi-access=free}}</ref> as part of a growing awareness of the problem. The replication crisis represents an important body of research in ], which aims to improve the quality of all scientific research while reducing waste.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Ioannidis |first1=John P. A. |last2=Fanelli |first2=Daniele |last3=Dunne |first3=Debbie Drake |last4=Goodman |first4=Steven N. |date=2 October 2015 |title=Meta-research: Evaluation and Improvement of Research Methods and Practices |journal=PLOS Biology |volume=13 |issue=10 |pages=–1002264 |doi=10.1371/journal.pbio.1002264 |pmid=26431313 |pmc=4592065 |issn=1545-7885 |doi-access=free}}</ref> | |||
An area of study or speculation that masquerades as science in an attempt to claim legitimacy that it would not otherwise be able to achieve is sometimes referred to as ], ], or ].<ref>{{cite encyclopedia |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2021/entries/pseudo-science |title=Science and Pseudoscience |at=Section 2: The "science" of pseudoscience |encyclopedia=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |first1=Sven Ove |last1=Hansson |editor-last=Zalta |editor-first=Edward N. |date=3 September 2008 |access-date=28 May 2022 |archive-date=29 October 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211029205141/https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2021/entries/pseudo-science/ |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Shermer |first=Michael |author-link=Michael Shermer |year=1997 |title=Why people believe weird things: pseudoscience, superstition, and other confusions of our time |url=https://archive.org/details/isbn_9780965594875 |url-access=registration |location=New York |publisher=W. H. Freeman & Co. |isbn=978-0-7167-3090-3 |page=17}}</ref> Physicist ] coined the term "]" for cases in which researchers believe, and at a glance, look like they are doing science but lack the honesty to allow their results to be rigorously evaluated.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://neurotheory.columbia.edu/~ken/cargo_cult.html |title=Cargo Cult Science |last=Feynman |first=Richard |year=1974 |website=Center for Theoretical Neuroscience |publisher=Columbia University |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050304032544/http://neurotheory.columbia.edu/~ken/cargo_cult.html |archive-date=4 March 2005 |url-status=dead |access-date=4 November 2016}}</ref> Various types of commercial advertising, ranging from hype to fraud, may fall into these categories. Science has been described as "the most important tool" for separating valid claims from invalid ones.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Novella |first=Steven |title=The Skeptics' Guide to the Universe: How to Know What's Really Real in a World Increasingly Full of Fake |title-link=The Skeptics' Guide to the Universe (book) |publisher=Hodder & Stoughton |year=2018 |isbn=978-1473696419 |page=162 |author-link=Steven Novella}}</ref> | |||
Sociologist ] scrutinizes science for operating with the presumption that the only acceptable criticisms of science are those conducted within the methodological framework that science has set up for itself. That science insists that only those who have been inducted into its community, through means of training and credentials, are qualified to make these criticisms.<ref>{{Cite book| isbn = 0816616590 | title = Science As Power: Discourse and Ideology in Modern Society | page = viii (preface) | publisher = University of Minnesota Press | last = Aronowitz | first = Stanley | year = 1988 | authorlink = Stanley Aronowitz}}</ref> Aronowitz also alleges that while scientists consider it absurd that ] uses biblical references to bolster their claim that the ] is true, scientists pull the same tactic by using the tools of science to settle disputes concerning its own validity.<ref>Stanley Aronowitz in conversation with Derrick Jensen in {{Cite book| isbn = 1931498520 | title = Welcome to the Machine: Science, Surveillance, and the Culture of Control | page = 31 | publisher = Chelsea Green Publishing Company | last = Jensen | first = Derrick | year = 2004 | authorlink = Derrick Jensen}}</ref> | |||
There can also be an element of political or ideological bias on all sides of scientific debates. Sometimes, research may be characterised as "bad science", research that may be well-intended but is incorrect, obsolete, incomplete, or over-simplified expositions of scientific ideas. The term "]" refers to situations such as where researchers have intentionally misrepresented their published data or have purposely given credit for a discovery to the wrong person.<ref>{{cite journal |title=Coping with fraud |journal=The COPE Report 1999 |pages=11–18 |url=http://www.publicationethics.org.uk/reports/1999/1999pdf3.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070928151119/http://www.publicationethics.org.uk/reports/1999/1999pdf3.pdf |quote=It is 10 years, to the month, since Stephen Lock ... Reproduced with kind permission of the Editor, The Lancet. |archive-date=28 September 2007 |access-date=21 July 2011}}</ref> | |||
Psychologist ] believed that though science attempted to understand all of nature, the experimental method imposed artificial and conditional questions that evoke equally artificial answers. Jung encouraged, instead of these 'artificial' methods, empirically testing the world in a ] manner.<ref>{{Cite book| isbn = 0691017948 | title = Synchronicity: An Acausal Connecting Principle | page = 35 | publisher = Princeton University Press | last = Jung | first = Carl | year = 1973 | authorlink = Carl Jung}}</ref> David Parkin compared the ] stance of science to that of ].<ref>{{harvnb|Parkin|1991}} "Simultaneity and Sequencing in the Oracular Speech of Kenyan Diviners", p. 185.</ref> He suggested that, to the degree that divination is an epistemologically specific means of gaining insight into a given question, science itself can be considered a form of divination that is framed from a Western view of the nature (and thus possible applications) of knowledge. | |||
== Philosophy of science == | |||
Several academics have offered critiques concerning ] in science. In ''Science and Ethics'', for example, the philosopher ] examines the relevance of ethics to science, and argues in favor of making education in ethics part and parcel of scientific training.<ref>{{Cite book | |||
{{anchor|ConjectureAndRefutation}}], the addition of ] in Ptolemaic astronomy was "normal science" within a paradigm, whereas the ] was a paradigm shift|alt=Depiction of epicycles, where a planet orbit is going around in a bigger orbit]] | |||
| first=Bernard E. | last=Rollin | year=2006 | |||
| title=Science and Ethics | |||
| publisher=Cambridge University Press | |||
| isbn=0521857546 | |||
| oclc=238793190 }}</ref> | |||
There are different schools of thought in the ]. The most popular position is ], which holds that knowledge is created by a process involving observation; scientific theories generalise observations.<ref name="Godfrey-Smith2003a">{{cite book |last=Godfrey-Smith |first=Peter |url=https://archive.org/details/theoryrealityint00godf |title=Theory and Reality: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science |publisher=University of Chicago |year=2003c |isbn=978-0-226-30062-7 |pages=–56 |chapter=Induction and confirmation |url-access=limited}}</ref> Empiricism generally encompasses ], a position that explains how general theories can be made from the finite amount of empirical evidence available. Many versions of empiricism exist, with the predominant ones being ] and the ].<ref>{{cite book |last=Godfrey-Smith |first=Peter |url=https://archive.org/details/theoryrealityint00godf |title=Theory and Reality: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science |publisher=University of Chicago |year=2003o |isbn=978-0-226-30062-7 |pages=–232 |chapter=Empiricism, naturalism, and scientific realism? |url-access=limited}}</ref><ref name="Godfrey-Smith2003a" /> | |||
===Media perspectives=== | |||
The ] face a number of pressures that can prevent them from accurately depicting competing scientific claims in terms of their credibility within the scientific community as a whole. Determining how much weight to give different sides in a ] may require considerable expertise regarding the matter.<ref>{{Cite web | |||
| last=Dickson | first=David | date=October 11, 2004 | |||
| url=http://www.scidev.net/Editorials/index.cfm?fuseaction=readEditorials&itemid=131&language=1 | |||
| title=Science journalism must keep a critical edge | |||
| publisher=Science and Development Network | |||
| accessdate=2008-02-20 | |||
}}</ref> Few journalists have real scientific knowledge, and even ]s who know a great deal about certain scientific issues may be ignorant about other scientific issues that they are suddenly asked to cover.<ref>{{Cite web | |||
| last=Mooney | first=Chris | year=2007 | |||
| url=http://cjrarchives.org/issues/2004/6/mooney-science.asp | |||
| title=Blinded By Science, How 'Balanced' Coverage Lets the Scientific Fringe Hijack Reality | |||
| publisher=Columbia Journalism Review | |||
| accessdate=2008-02-20 | |||
}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal | |||
| last=McIlwaine | first=S. | coauthors=Nguyen, D. A. | |||
| title=Are Journalism Students Equipped to Write About Science? | |||
| journal=Australian Studies in Journalism | |||
| year=2005 | volume=14 | pages=41–60 | |||
| url=http://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:8064 | |||
| accessdate=2008-02-20 | |||
| ref=harv }}</ref> | |||
Empiricism has stood in contrast to ], the position originally associated with ], which holds that knowledge is created by the human intellect, not by observation.<ref>{{cite book |last=Godfrey-Smith |first=Peter |url=https://archive.org/details/theoryrealityint00godf |title=Theory and Reality: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science |publisher=University of Chicago |year=2003b |isbn=978-0-226-30062-7 |pages=–38 |chapter=Logic plus empiricism |url-access=limited}}</ref> ] is a contrasting 20th-century approach to science, first defined by Austrian-British philosopher ]. Popper rejected the way that empiricism describes the connection between theory and observation. He claimed that theories are not generated by observation, but that observation is made in the light of theories, and that the only way theory A can be affected by observation is after theory A were to conflict with observation, but theory B were to survive the observation.<ref name="Godfrey-Smith2003b">{{cite book |last=Godfrey-Smith |first=Peter |url=https://archive.org/details/theoryrealityint00godf |title=Theory and Reality: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science |publisher=University of Chicago |year=2003d |isbn=978-0-226-30062-7 |pages=–74 |chapter=Popper: Conjecture and refutation |url-access=limited}}</ref> | |||
===Politics and public perception of science=== | |||
Popper proposed replacing verifiability with ] as the landmark of scientific theories, replacing induction with ] as the empirical method.<ref name="Godfrey-Smith2003b" /> Popper further claimed that there is actually only one universal method, not specific to science: the negative method of criticism, ],<ref>{{cite book |last=Godfrey-Smith |first=Peter |url=https://archive.org/details/theoryrealityint00godf |title=Theory and Reality: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science |publisher=University of Chicago |year=2003g |isbn=978-0-226-30062-7 |pages=–121 |chapter=Lakatos, Laudan, Feyerabend, and frameworks |url-access=limited}}</ref> covering all products of the human mind, including science, mathematics, philosophy, and art.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Popper |first=Karl |title=Objective Knowledge |year=1972}}</ref> | |||
{{see also|Politicization of science}} | |||
Another approach, ], emphasises the utility of theories as instruments for explaining and predicting phenomena. It views scientific theories as black boxes, with only their input (initial conditions) and output (predictions) being relevant. Consequences, theoretical entities, and logical structure are claimed to be things that should be ignored.<ref>{{cite book |last=Newton-Smith |first=W. H. |url=https://archive.org/details/rationalityofsci0000newt |title=The Rationality of Science |publisher=Routledge |year=1994 |isbn=978-0-7100-0913-5 |location=London |page= |url-access=registration}}</ref> Close to instrumentalism is ], according to which the main criterion for the success of a scientific theory is whether what it says about observable entities is true.<ref>{{cite thesis |last=Votsis |first=I. |year=2004 |title=The Epistemological Status of Scientific Theories: An Investigation of the Structural Realist Account |publisher=University of London, London School of Economics |degree=PhD |page=39}}</ref> | |||
Many issues damage the relationship of science to the media and the use of science and scientific arguments by ]s. As a very broad generalisation, many politicians seek certainties and ''facts'' whilst scientists typically offer probabilities and caveats. However, politicians' ability to be heard in the ] frequently distorts the scientific understanding by the public. Examples in ] include the controversy over the ] ], and the 1988 forced resignation of a Government Minister, ] for revealing the high probability that battery eggs were contaminated with '']''.<ref>, "On This Day," BBC News, December 3, 1988.</ref> | |||
] argued that the process of observation and evaluation takes place within a paradigm, a ] "portrait" of the world that is consistent with observations made from its framing. He characterised ''normal science'' as the process of observation and "puzzle solving", which takes place within a paradigm, whereas ''revolutionary science'' occurs when one paradigm overtakes another in a ].<ref>{{Cite encyclopedia |last=Bird |first=Alexander |year=2013 |editor1-last=Zalta |editor1-first=Edward N. |title=Thomas Kuhn |url=http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2013/entries/thomas-kuhn/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200715191833/https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2013/entries/thomas-kuhn/ |archive-date=15 July 2020 |access-date=26 October 2015 |encyclopedia=Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy}}</ref> Each paradigm has its own distinct questions, aims, and interpretations. The choice between paradigms involves setting two or more "portraits" against the world and deciding which likeness is most promising. A paradigm shift occurs when a significant number of observational anomalies arise in the old paradigm and a new paradigm makes sense of them. That is, the choice of a new paradigm is based on observations, even though those observations are made against the background of the old paradigm. For Kuhn, acceptance or rejection of a paradigm is a social process as much as a logical process. Kuhn's position, however, is not one of ].<ref>{{Cite book |last=Kuhn |first=Thomas S. |url=https://philpapers.org/rec/KUHTSO-2 |title=The Structure of Scientific Revolutions |publisher=University of Chicago Press |year=1970 |isbn=978-0-226-45804-5 |edition=2nd |page=206 |access-date=30 May 2022 |archive-date=19 October 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211019102817/https://philpapers.org/rec/KUHTSO-2 |url-status=live}}</ref> | |||
==See also== | |||
{{Portal|Science}} | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
Another approach often cited in debates of ] against controversial movements like "]" is ]. Naturalists maintain that a difference should be made between natural and supernatural, and science should be restricted to natural explanations.<ref>{{cite book |last=Godfrey-Smith |first=Peter |url=https://archive.org/details/theoryrealityint00godf |title=Theory and Reality: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science |publisher=University of Chicago |year=2003 |isbn=978-0-226-30062-7 |pages=–162 |chapter=Naturalistic philosophy in theory and practice |url-access=limited}}</ref> Methodological naturalism maintains that science requires strict adherence to ] study and independent verification.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Brugger |first=E. Christian |year=2004 |title=Casebeer, William D. Natural Ethical Facts: Evolution, Connectionism, and Moral Cognition |journal=The Review of Metaphysics |volume=58 |issue=2}}</ref> | |||
==Notes== | |||
{{Reflist|2}} | |||
== Scientific community == | |||
==References== | |||
The ] is a network of interacting scientists who conduct scientific research. The community consists of smaller groups working in scientific fields. By having ], through discussion and debate within journals and conferences, scientists maintain the quality of research methodology and objectivity when interpreting results.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Kornfeld |first1=W. |last2=Hewitt |first2=C. E. |year=1981 |title=The Scientific Community Metaphor |url=http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/5693/AIM-641.pdf?sequence=2 |journal=IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics |volume=11 |issue=1 |pages=24–33 |doi=10.1109/TSMC.1981.4308575 |hdl-access=free |hdl=1721.1/5693 |s2cid=1322857 |access-date=26 May 2022 |archive-date=8 April 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160408100757/http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/5693/AIM-641.pdf?sequence=2 |url-status=live}}</ref> | |||
* ] (2005). ''Science, history of the philosophy'', as cited in {{Cite book|author=Honderich, Ted |title=The Oxford companion to philosophy |publisher=Oxford University Press |location=Oxford ] |year=2005 |pages= |isbn=0199264791 |oclc= 173262485|doi=}} of.'' Oxford Companion to Philosophy. Oxford. | |||
* {{Cite book|author=Feynman, R.P.|year=1999|title=The Pleasure of Finding Things Out: The Best Short Works of Richard P. Feynman|publisher=Perseus Books Group|isbn=0465023959 | oclc = 181597764}} | |||
* ]. (2005). ''Science, problems of the philosophy of.'', as cited in {{Cite book|author=Honderich, Ted |title=The Oxford companion to philosophy |publisher=Oxford University Press |location=Oxford ] |year=2005|isbn=0199264791 |oclc= 173262485}} | |||
* {{Cite book|last=Parkin|first=D|year=1991|article=Simultaneity and Sequencing in the Oracular Speech of Kenyan Diviners|editor=Philip M. Peek|title=African Divination Systems: Ways of Knowing|location=Indianapolis, IN|publisher=Indiana University Press|ref=harv|postscript=<!-- Bot inserted parameter. Either remove it; or change its value to "." for the cite to end in a ".", as necessary. -->{{inconsistent citations}}}}. | |||
*{{Cite document|title=How to Think Straight About Psychology|last=Stanovich|first=Keith E| year=2007| location=Boston|publisher=Pearson Education|ref=harv|postscript=<!-- Bot inserted parameter. Either remove it; or change its value to "." for the cite to end in a ".", as necessary. -->{{inconsistent citations}}}} | |||
== |
=== Scientists === | ||
] was the first person to be awarded two Nobel Prizes: ] in 1903 and ] in 1911<ref name="Estreicher1938" />|alt=Portrait of a middle-aged woman]] | |||
* Augros, Robert M., Stanciu, George N., "The New Story of Science: mind and the universe", Lake Bluff, Ill.: Regnery Gateway, c1984. ISBN 0-89526-833-7 | |||
Scientists are individuals who conduct scientific research to advance knowledge in an area of interest.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://eowilsonfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/the-big-read-eusocial-climbers.pdf |title=Eusocial climbers |publisher=E. O. Wilson Foundation |access-date=3 September 2018 |quote=But he's not a scientist, he's never done scientific research. My definition of a scientist is that you can complete the following sentence: 'he or she has shown that...'," Wilson says. |archive-date=27 April 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190427085753/https://eowilsonfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/the-big-read-eusocial-climbers.pdf |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://sciencecouncil.org/about-science/our-definition-of-a-scientist/ |title=Our definition of a scientist |publisher=Science Council |access-date=7 September 2018 |quote=A scientist is someone who systematically gathers and uses research and evidence, making a hypothesis and testing it, to gain and share understanding and knowledge. |archive-date=23 August 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190823135636/https://sciencecouncil.org/about-science/our-definition-of-a-scientist/ |url-status=live}}</ref> In modern times, many professional scientists are trained in an academic setting and, upon completion, attain an ], with the highest degree being a doctorate (e.g. a Doctor of Philosophy, or PhD).<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Cyranoski |first1=David |last2=Gilbert |first2=Natasha |last3=Ledford |first3=Heidi |last4=Nayar |first4=Anjali |author4-link=Anjali Nayar |last5=Yahia |first5=Mohammed |year=2011 |title=Education: The PhD factory |journal=Nature |volume=472 |issue=7343 |pages=276–279 |doi=10.1038/472276a |pmid=21512548 |bibcode=2011Natur.472..276C |doi-access=free}}</ref> Many scientists pursue careers in various ] such as ], ], ], and nonprofit organisations.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Kwok |first1=Roberta |title=Flexible working: Science in the gig economy |journal=Nature |volume=550 |pages=419–421 |doi=10.1038/nj7677-549a |year=2017 |issue=7677 |doi-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |year=2007 |title=Many junior scientists need to take a hard look at their job prospects |journal=Nature |volume=550 |pages=549–552 |doi=10.1038/nj7677-549a |last1=Woolston |first1=Chris |issue=7677 |doi-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Lee |first1=Adrian |last2=Dennis |first2=Carina |last3=Campbell |first3=Phillip |year=2007 |title=Graduate survey: A love–hurt relationship |journal=Nature |volume=550 |issue=7677 |pages=549–552 |doi=10.1038/nj7677-549a |doi-access=free}}</ref> | |||
* Baxter, Charles {{PDFlink||66.4 KB}} | |||
* {{Cite book|last=Becker|first=Ernest|title=The structure of evil; an essay on the unification of the science of man|location=New York|publisher=G. Braziller|year=1968|authorlink=Ernest Becker}} | |||
* Cole, K. C., ''Things your teacher never told you about science: Nine shocking revelations'' ], ], March 23, 1986, pg 21+ | |||
* Feynman, Richard | |||
* Gopnik, Alison, , ], Winter 2004. | |||
* Krige, John, and Dominique Pestre, eds., ''Science in the Twentieth Century'', Routledge 2003, ISBN 0-415-28606-9 | |||
* ], '']'', 1962. | |||
* McComas, William F. {{PDFlink||189 KB}} ], ]. Direct Instruction News. '''Spring 2002''' 24–30. | |||
* {{Cite book|last=Obler|first=Paul C.|coauthors=Estrin, Herman A.|title = The New Scientist: Essays on the Methods and Values of Modern Science | publisher = ], Doubleday |year=1962}} | |||
* {{Cite book| first=Daniel Patrick | last=Thurs | year=2007 | title=Science Talk: Changing Notions of Science in American Popular Culture| pages=22–52 | publisher=Rutgers University Press | location=New Brunswick, NJ | isbn=978-0-8135-4073-3 }} | |||
* ] (2008). ''Imagining the Future: Science and American Democracy''. New York, Encounter Books. ISBN 1-59403-209-2 | |||
* Stephen Gaukroger. ''The Emergence of a Scientific Culture: Science and the Shaping of Modernity 1210–1685.'' Oxford, ], 2006, 576 pp. | |||
Scientists exhibit a strong curiosity about reality and a desire to apply scientific knowledge for the benefit of health, nations, the environment, or industries. Other motivations include recognition by their peers and prestige. In modern times, many scientists have ] in an area of science and pursue careers in various sectors of the economy, such as ], ], ], and nonprofit environments.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Cyranoski |first1=David |last2=Gilbert |first2=Natasha |last3=Ledford |first3=Heidi |last4=Nayar |first4=Anjali |last5=Yahia |first5=Mohammed |year=2011 |title=Education: The PhD factory |journal=Nature |volume=472 |issue=7343 |pages=276–279 |bibcode=2011Natur.472..276C |doi=10.1038/472276a |pmid=21512548 |doi-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Kwok |first1=Roberta |year=2017 |title=Flexible working: Science in the gig economy |journal=Nature |volume=550 |issue=7677 |pages=419–421 |doi=10.1038/nj7677-549a |doi-access=free}}</ref>''<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Lee |first1=Adrian |last2=Dennis |first2=Carina |last3=Campbell |first3=Phillip |year=2007 |title=Graduate survey: A love–hurt relationship |journal=Nature |volume=550 |issue=7677 |pages=549–552 |doi=10.1038/nj7677-549a |doi-access=free}}</ref>'' | |||
==External links== | |||
{{Sister project links}} | |||
'''Publications''' | |||
* "'']''". ].org | |||
Science has historically been a male-dominated field, with notable exceptions. ] faced considerable discrimination in science, much as they did in other areas of male-dominated societies. For example, women were frequently passed over for job opportunities and denied credit for their work.<ref>{{cite book |last=Whaley |first=Leigh Ann |title=Women's History as Scientists |location=Santa Barbara, CA |publisher=ABC-CLIO |year=2003}}</ref> The achievements of women in science have been attributed to the defiance of their traditional role as labourers within the ].<ref>{{Cite book |last=Spanier |first=Bonnie |title=Im/partial Science: Gender Identity in Molecular Biology |publisher=Indiana University Press |year=1995 |isbn=978-0-253-20968-9 |chapter=From Molecules to Brains, Normal Science Supports Sexist Beliefs about Difference}}</ref> | |||
'''News''' | |||
* . Science news by the journal '']'' | |||
* . An weekly magazine published by ] | |||
* | |||
* | |||
* | |||
* | |||
* from Discover Science & Engineering | |||
* Scientific Videoportal and Community | |||
=== Learned societies === | |||
'''Resources''' | |||
], 1900|left]] | |||
* : | |||
] for the communication and promotion of scientific thought and experimentation have existed since the Renaissance.<ref>{{cite web |last=Parrott |first=Jim |date=9 August 2007 |url=http://www.scholarly-societies.org/1599andearlier.html |title=Chronicle for Societies Founded from 1323 to 1599 |publisher=Scholarly Societies Project |access-date=11 September 2007 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140106185404/http://www.scholarly-societies.org/1599andearlier.html |archive-date=6 January 2014}}</ref> Many scientists belong to a learned society that promotes their respective scientific discipline, ], or group of related disciplines.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.esac.ca/about/what-is-a-learned-society/ |title=The Environmental Studies Association of Canada – What is a Learned Society? |access-date=10 May 2013 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130529163615/http://www.esac.ca/about/what-is-a-learned-society/ |archive-date=29 May 2013}}</ref> Membership may either be open to all, require possession of scientific credentials, or conferred by election.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.britishcouncil.org/science-uk-organisations-learned-societies.htm |title=Learned societies & academies |access-date=10 May 2013 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140603140851/http://www.britishcouncil.org/science-uk-organisations-learned-societies.htm |archive-date=3 June 2014}}</ref> Most scientific societies are nonprofit organisations,<ref>{{Cite web |date=24 June 2019 |title=Learned Societies, the key to realising an open access future? |url=https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2019/06/24/learned-societies-the-key-to-realising-an-open-access-future/ |access-date=22 January 2023 |website=Impact of Social Sciences |publisher=London School of Economics |archive-date=5 February 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230205140831/https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2019/06/24/learned-societies-the-key-to-realising-an-open-access-future/ |url-status=live}}</ref> and many are ]s. Their activities typically include holding regular ] for the presentation and discussion of new research results and publishing or sponsoring ]s in their discipline. Some societies act as ], regulating the activities of their members in the public interest, or the collective interest of the membership. | |||
** (ESOF) | |||
* | |||
* | |||
* in ''Dictionary of the History of Ideas''. (Dictionary's new electronic format is badly botched, entries after "Design" are inaccessible. ''Internet Archive'' ). | |||
* University of California Museum of Paleontology | |||
* . Selected science information provided by U.S. Government agencies, including research and development results. | |||
The professionalisation of science, begun in the 19th century, was partly enabled by the creation of national distinguished ] such as the Italian {{lang|it|]}} in 1603,<ref>{{cite web |year=2006 |url=http://positivamente.lincei.it/ |title=Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei |language=it |access-date=11 September 2007 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100228005402/http://positivamente.lincei.it/ |archive-date=28 February 2010}}</ref> the British ] in 1660,<ref>{{cite web |date=7 July 2004 |title=Prince of Wales opens Royal Society's refurbished building |url=http://royalsociety.org/News.aspx?id=973&terms=prince+of+wales |access-date=7 December 2009 |publisher=The Royal Society |archive-date=9 April 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150409010143/https://royalsociety.org/News.aspx?id=973&terms=prince+of+wales |url-status=live}}</ref> the ] in 1666,<ref>{{cite web |first=G. G. |last=Meynell |url=http://www.haven.u-net.com/6text_7B2.htm#Appendix%202 |title=The French Academy of Sciences, 1666–91: A reassessment of the French Académie royale des sciences under Colbert (1666–83) and Louvois (1683–91) |access-date=13 October 2011 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120118174108/http://www.haven.u-net.com/6text_7B2.htm#Appendix%202 |archive-date=18 January 2012}}</ref> the American ] in 1863,<ref>{{cite web |title=Founding of the National Academy of Sciences |url=http://www7.nationalacademies.org/archives/nasfounding.html |access-date=12 March 2012 |publisher=.nationalacademies.org |archive-date=3 February 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130203154802/http://www7.nationalacademies.org/archives/nasfounding.html |url-status=live}}</ref> the German ] in 1911,<ref>{{Cite web |title=The founding of the Kaiser Wilhelm Society (1911) |url=https://www.mpg.de/946619/5_event2-1911 |access-date=30 May 2022 |publisher=Max-Planck-Gesellschaft |archive-date=2 March 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220302052520/https://www.mpg.de/946619/5_event2-1911 |url-status=live}}</ref> and the ] in 1949.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Introduction |url=https://english.cas.cn/about_us/introduction/201501/t20150114_135284.shtml |access-date=31 May 2022 |website=Chinese Academy of Sciences |archive-date=31 March 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220331215338/https://english.cas.cn/about_us/introduction/201501/t20150114_135284.shtml |url-status=live}}</ref> International scientific organisations, such as the ], are devoted to ] for science advancement.<ref>{{Cite web |date=5 July 2018 |title=Two main Science Councils merge to address complex global challenges |url=https://en.unesco.org/news/two-main-science-councils-merge-address-complex-global-challenges |access-date=21 October 2018 |publisher=UNESCO |archive-date=12 July 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210712044005/https://en.unesco.org/news/two-main-science-councils-merge-address-complex-global-challenges |url-status=live}}</ref> | |||
] | |||
=== Awards === | |||
{{Link FA|nl}} | |||
]s are usually given to individuals or organisations that have made significant contributions to a discipline. They are often given by prestigious institutions; thus, it is considered a great honour for a scientist receiving them. Since the early Renaissance, scientists have often been awarded medals, money, and titles. The Nobel Prize, a widely regarded prestigious award, is awarded annually to those who have achieved scientific advances in the fields of medicine, physics, and ].<ref>{{cite news |last=Stockton |first=Nick |date=7 October 2014 |title=How did the Nobel Prize become the biggest award on Earth? |newspaper=Wired |url=https://www.wired.com/2014/10/whats-nobel-prize-become-biggest-award-planet |url-status=live |access-date=3 September 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190619044702/https://www.wired.com/2014/10/whats-nobel-prize-become-biggest-award-planet/ |archive-date=19 June 2019}}</ref> | |||
{{Link FA|tr}} | |||
== Society == | |||
] | |||
{{Redirect-distinguish|Science and society|Science & Society|Sociology of scientific knowledge}} | |||
] | |||
] | |||
=== Funding and policies === | |||
] | |||
] as percentage of ], peaking at 4.4% in 1966 and slowly declining since|alt=see caption]] | |||
] | |||
] through a competitive process in which potential research projects are evaluated and only the most promising receive funding. Such processes, which are run by government, corporations, or foundations, allocate scarce funds. Total research funding in most ] is between 1.5% and 3% of GDP.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/49/45/24236156.pdf |title=Main Science and Technology Indicators – 2008-1 |publisher=] |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100215172528/http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/49/45/24236156.pdf |archive-date=15 February 2010}}</ref> In the ], around two-thirds of ] in scientific and technical fields is carried out by industry, and 20% and 10%, respectively, by universities and government. The government funding proportion in certain fields is higher, and it dominates research in social science and the ]. In less developed nations, the government provides the bulk of the funds for their basic scientific research.<ref>{{Cite book |url=http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/science-and-technology/oecd-science-technology-and-industry-scoreboard-2015_sti_scoreboard-2015-en |title=OECD Science, Technology and Industry Scoreboard 2015: Innovation for growth and society |publisher=OECD |year=2015 |isbn=978-9264239784 |page=156 |doi=10.1787/sti_scoreboard-2015-en |via=oecd-ilibrary.org |access-date=28 May 2022 |archive-date=25 May 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220525063455/https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/science-and-technology/oecd-science-technology-and-industry-scoreboard-2015_sti_scoreboard-2015-en |url-status=live}}</ref> | |||
] | |||
] | |||
Many governments have dedicated agencies to support scientific research, such as the ] in the United States,<ref>{{cite journal |last=Kevles |first=Daniel |year=1977 |title=The National Science Foundation and the Debate over Postwar Research Policy, 1942–1945 |journal=Isis |volume=68 |issue=241 |pages=4–26 |doi=10.1086/351711 |pmid=320157 |s2cid=32956693}}</ref> the ] in Argentina,<ref>{{Cite web |title=Argentina, National Scientific and Technological Research Council (CONICET) |url=https://council.science/member/argentina-national-scientific-and-technological-research-council-conicet/ |access-date=31 May 2022 |website=International Science Council |archive-date=16 May 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220516220311/https://council.science/member/argentina-national-scientific-and-technological-research-council-conicet/ |url-status=live}}</ref> ] in Australia,<ref>{{Cite news |last=Innis |first=Michelle |date=17 May 2016 |title=Australia to Lay Off Leading Scientist on Sea Levels |work=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/18/world/australia/australia-to-lay-off-leading-scientist-on-sea-levels.html |url-status=live |url-access=limited |access-date=31 May 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210507080237/https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/18/world/australia/australia-to-lay-off-leading-scientist-on-sea-levels.html |archive-date=7 May 2021 |issn=0362-4331}}</ref> ] in France,<ref>{{Cite web |date=20 October 2021 |title=Le CNRS recherche 10.000 passionnés du blob |url=https://www.lefigaro.fr/flash-actu/le-cnrs-recherche-10-000-passionnes-du-blob-20211020 |access-date=31 May 2022 |website=] |language=fr |archive-date=27 April 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220427225305/https://www.lefigaro.fr/flash-actu/le-cnrs-recherche-10-000-passionnes-du-blob-20211020 |url-status=live}}</ref> the ] in Germany,<ref>{{Cite news |last=Bredow |first=Rafaela von |date=18 December 2021 |title=How a Prestigious Scientific Organization Came Under Suspicion of Treating Women Unequally |work=Der Spiegel |url=https://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/how-a-prestigious-scientific-organization-came-under-suspicion-of-treating-women-unequally-a-96da63b5-19af-4fde-b044-445f9cfd6159 |access-date=31 May 2022 |issn=2195-1349 |archive-date=29 May 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220529004707/https://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/how-a-prestigious-scientific-organization-came-under-suspicion-of-treating-women-unequally-a-96da63b5-19af-4fde-b044-445f9cfd6159 |url-status=live}}</ref> and ] in Spain.<ref>{{Cite web |date=12 May 2022 |title=En espera de una "revolucionaria" noticia sobre Sagitario A*, el agujero negro supermasivo en el corazón de nuestra galaxia |url=https://www.elmundo.es/ciencia-y-salud/ciencia/2022/05/12/627cca26fdddff17068b4590.html |access-date=31 May 2022 |website=ELMUNDO |language=es |archive-date=13 May 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220513185034/https://www.elmundo.es/ciencia-y-salud/ciencia/2022/05/12/627cca26fdddff17068b4590.html |url-status=live}}</ref> In commercial research and development, all but the most research-orientated corporations focus more heavily on near-term commercialisation possibilities than research driven by curiosity.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Fletcher |first1=Anthony C. |last2=Bourne |first2=Philip E. |date=27 September 2012 |title=Ten Simple Rules To Commercialize Scientific Research |journal=PLOS Computational Biology |volume=8 |issue=9 |pages=e1002712 |doi=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002712 |issn=1553-734X |pmc=3459878 |pmid=23028299 |bibcode=2012PLSCB...8E2712F |doi-access=free}}</ref> | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] is concerned with policies that affect the conduct of the scientific enterprise, including ], often in pursuance of other national policy goals such as technological innovation to promote commercial product development, weapons development, health care, and environmental monitoring. Science policy sometimes refers to the act of applying scientific knowledge and consensus to the development of public policies. In accordance with public policy being concerned about the well-being of its citizens, science policy's goal is to consider how science and technology can best serve the public.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Marburger |first=John Harmen III |title=Science policy up close |date=10 February 2015 |others=Crease, Robert P. |isbn=978-0-674-41709-0 |location=Cambridge, MA |publisher=Harvard University Press}}</ref> Public policy can directly affect the funding of ] and intellectual infrastructure for industrial research by providing tax incentives to those organisations that fund research.<ref name="Bush1945" /> | |||
] | |||
] | |||
=== Education and awareness === | |||
] | |||
{{Main|2 = Public awareness of science|3 = Science journalism}} | |||
] | |||
]]] | |||
] | |||
] for the general public is embedded in the school curriculum, and is supplemented by ] (for example, YouTube and Khan Academy), museums, and science magazines and blogs. Major organisations of scientists such as the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) consider the sciences to be a part of the liberal arts traditions of learning, along with philosophy and history.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Gauch |first1=Hugh G. |title=Scientific Method in Brief |year=2012 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |location=New York |isbn=9781107666726 |pages=7–10}}</ref> Scientific literacy is chiefly concerned with an understanding of the ], units and methods of ], ], a basic understanding of statistics (], ] versus ] observations, ]), and a basic understanding of core scientific fields such as physics, ], ], ecology, geology, and ]. As a student advances into higher stages of ], the curriculum becomes more in depth. Traditional subjects usually included in the curriculum are natural and formal sciences, although recent movements include social and applied science as well.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Benneworth |first1=Paul |last2=Jongbloed |first2=Ben W. |date=31 July 2009 |title=Who matters to universities? A stakeholder perspective on humanities, arts and social sciences valorisation |journal=Higher Education |volume=59 |issue=5 |pages=567–588 |doi=10.1007/s10734-009-9265-2 |issn=0018-1560 |doi-access=free |url=https://ris.utwente.nl/ws/files/47901538/Benneworth2010Who.pdf |access-date=16 August 2023 |archive-date=24 October 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231024214150/https://ris.utwente.nl/ws/files/47901538/Benneworth2010Who.pdf |url-status=live}}</ref> | |||
] | |||
] | |||
The mass media face pressures that can prevent them from accurately depicting competing scientific claims in terms of their credibility within the scientific community as a whole. Determining how much weight to give different sides in a ] may require considerable expertise regarding the matter.<ref>{{cite web |last=Dickson |first=David |date=11 October 2004 |title=Science journalism must keep a critical edge |url=http://www.scidev.net/en/editorials/science-journalism-must-keep-a-critical-edge.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100621053624/http://www.scidev.net/en/editorials/science-journalism-must-keep-a-critical-edge.html |archive-date=21 June 2010 |publisher=Science and Development Network}}</ref> Few journalists have real scientific knowledge, and even ]s who are knowledgeable about certain scientific issues may be ignorant about other scientific issues that they are suddenly asked to cover.<ref>{{cite magazine |last=Mooney |first=Chris |date=Nov–Dec 2004 |title=Blinded By Science, How 'Balanced' Coverage Lets the Scientific Fringe Hijack Reality |url=http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/2010/01/15/blinded-by-science-how-balanced-coverage-lets-the-scientific-fringe-hijack-reality/ |url-status=live |magazine=Columbia Journalism Review |volume=43 |issue=4 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100117181240/http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/2010/01/15/blinded-by-science-how-balanced-coverage-lets-the-scientific-fringe-hijack-reality/ |archive-date=17 January 2010 |access-date=20 February 2008}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=McIlwaine |first1=S. |last2=Nguyen |first2=D. A. |year=2005 |title=Are Journalism Students Equipped to Write About Science? |url=http://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:8064 |url-status=live |journal=Australian Studies in Journalism |volume=14 |pages=41–60 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080801163322/http://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:8064 |archive-date=1 August 2008 |access-date=20 February 2008}}</ref> | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] such as '']'', '']'', and '']'' cater to the needs of a much wider readership and provide a non-technical summary of popular areas of research, including notable discoveries and advances in certain fields of research.<ref>{{cite journal |author-last=Webb |author-first=Sarah |title=Popular science: Get the word out |journal=Nature |volume=504 |issue=7478 |pages=177–179 |date=December 2013 |pmid=24312943 |doi=10.1038/nj7478-177a |doi-access=free}}</ref> The science fiction genre, primarily ], can transmit the ideas and methods of science to the general public.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Wilde |first=Fran |author-link=Fran Wilde (author) |date=21 January 2016 |title=How Do You Like Your Science Fiction? Ten Authors Weigh In On 'Hard' vs. 'Soft' SF |url=https://www.tor.com/2016/01/21/how-do-you-like-your-science-fiction-ten-authors-weigh-in-on-hard-vs-soft-sf/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190404025029/https://www.tor.com/2016/01/21/how-do-you-like-your-science-fiction-ten-authors-weigh-in-on-hard-vs-soft-sf/ |archive-date=4 April 2019 |access-date=4 April 2019 |website=Tor.com}}</ref> Recent efforts to intensify or develop links between science and non-scientific disciplines, such as literature or poetry, include the ''Creative Writing Science'' resource developed through the ].<ref>{{cite web |first=Mario |last=Petrucci |url=http://writeideas.org.uk/creativescience/index.htm |title=Creative Writing – Science |access-date=27 April 2008 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090106015539/http://writeideas.org.uk/creativescience/index.htm |archive-date=6 January 2009}}</ref> | |||
] | |||
] | |||
=== Anti-science attitudes === | |||
] | |||
{{main|Antiscience}} | |||
] | |||
While the scientific method is broadly accepted in the scientific community, some fractions of society reject certain scientific positions or are sceptical about science. Examples are the common notion that ] is not a major health threat to the US (held by 39% of Americans in August 2021)<ref>{{Cite web |last1=Tyson |first1=Alec |last2=Funk |first2=Cary |last3=Kennedy |first3=Brian |last4=Johnson |first4=Courtney |date=15 September 2021 |title=Majority in U.S. Says Public Health Benefits of COVID-19 Restrictions Worth the Costs, Even as Large Shares Also See Downsides |url=https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2021/09/15/majority-in-u-s-says-public-health-benefits-of-covid-19-restrictions-worth-the-costs-even-as-large-shares-also-see-downsides/ |access-date=4 August 2022 |website=Pew Research Center Science & Society |archive-date=9 August 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220809114234/https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2021/09/15/majority-in-u-s-says-public-health-benefits-of-covid-19-restrictions-worth-the-costs-even-as-large-shares-also-see-downsides/ |url-status=live}}</ref> or the belief that ] is not a major threat to the US (also held by 40% of Americans, in late 2019 and early 2020).<ref>{{Cite web |last=Kennedy |first=Brian |title=U.S. concern about climate change is rising, but mainly among Democrats |url=https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/04/16/u-s-concern-about-climate-change-is-rising-but-mainly-among-democrats/ |access-date=4 August 2022 |website=Pew Research Center |date=16 April 2020 |archive-date=3 August 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220803101033/https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/04/16/u-s-concern-about-climate-change-is-rising-but-mainly-among-democrats/ |url-status=live}}</ref> Psychologists have pointed to four factors driving rejection of scientific results:<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Philipp-Muller |first1=Aviva |last2=Lee |first2=Spike W. S. |last3=Petty |first3=Richard E. |date=26 July 2022 |title=Why are people antiscience, and what can we do about it? |journal=Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences |volume=119 |issue=30 |pages=e2120755119 |doi=10.1073/pnas.2120755119 |doi-access=free |issn=0027-8424 |pmc=9335320 |pmid=35858405 |bibcode=2022PNAS..11920755P}}</ref> | |||
] | |||
* Scientific authorities are sometimes seen as inexpert, untrustworthy, or biased. | |||
] | |||
* Some ] social groups hold anti-science attitudes, in part because these groups have often been exploited in ].<ref>{{cite journal |title=A Test of Three Theories of Anti-Science Attitudes |year=2008 |doi=10.1080/00380237.2008.10571338 |last1=Gauchat |first1=Gordon William |journal=Sociological Focus |volume=41 |issue=4 |pages=337–357 |s2cid=144645723}}</ref> | |||
] | |||
* Messages from scientists may contradict deeply held existing beliefs or morals. | |||
] | |||
* The delivery of a scientific message may not be appropriately targeted to a recipient's learning style. | |||
] | |||
Anti-science attitudes often seem to be caused by fear of rejection in social groups. For instance, climate change is perceived as a threat by only 22% of Americans on the right side of the political spectrum, but by 85% on the left.<ref>{{Cite web |last1=Poushter |first1=Jacob |last2=Fagan |first2=Moira |last3=Gubbala |first3=Sneha |date=31 August 2022 |title=Climate Change Remains Top Global Threat Across 19-Country Survey |url=https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2022/08/31/climate-change-remains-top-global-threat-across-19-country-survey/ |access-date=5 September 2022 |website=Pew Research Center's Global Attitudes Project |archive-date=31 August 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220831225832/https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2022/08/31/climate-change-remains-top-global-threat-across-19-country-survey/ |url-status=live}}</ref> That is, if someone on the left would not consider climate change as a threat, this person may face contempt and be rejected in that social group. In fact, people may rather deny a scientifically accepted fact than lose or jeopardise their social status.<ref>{{Cite book |last=McRaney |first=David |title=How Minds Change: The Surprising Science of Belief, Opinion, and Persuasion |publisher=Portfolio/Penguin |year=2022 |isbn=978-0-593-19029-6 |location=New York}}</ref> | |||
] | |||
] | |||
=== Politics === | |||
] | |||
] by political party<ref>{{cite news |last1=McGreal |first1=Chris |date=26 October 2021 |title=Revealed: 60% of Americans say oil firms are to blame for the climate crisis |work=The Guardian |url=https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/oct/26/climate-change-poll-oil-gas-companies-environment |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211026122356/https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/oct/26/climate-change-poll-oil-gas-companies-environment |archive-date=26 October 2021 |quote=Source: Guardian/Vice/CCN/YouGov poll. Note: ±4% margin of error.}}</ref>|300x300px]]Attitudes towards science are often determined by political opinions and goals. Government, business and ]s have been known to use legal and economic pressure to influence scientific researchers. Many factors can act as facets of the ] such as ], perceived threats to religious beliefs, and fear for business interests.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Goldberg |first1=Jeanne |year=2017 |title=The Politicization of Scientific Issues: Looking through Galileo's Lens or through the Imaginary Looking Glass |url=https://www.csicop.org/si/show/politicization_of_scientific_issues |url-status=dead |journal=] |volume=41 |issue=5 |pages=34–39 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180816182350/https://www.csicop.org/si/show/politicization_of_scientific_issues |archive-date=16 August 2018 |access-date=16 August 2018}}</ref> Politicisation of science is usually accomplished when scientific information is presented in a way that emphasises the uncertainty associated with the ].<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Bolsen |first1=Toby |last2=Druckman |first2=James N. |author2-link=James N. Druckman |year=2015 |title=Counteracting the Politicization of Science |journal=Journal of Communication |issue=65 |page=746}}</ref> Tactics such as shifting conversation, failing to acknowledge facts, and capitalising on doubt of ] have been used to gain more attention for views that have been undermined by scientific evidence.<ref name="Freudenberg2008">{{cite journal |last1=Freudenberg |first1=William F. |last2=Gramling |first2=Robert |last3=Davidson |first3=Debra J. |year=2008 |title=Scientific Certainty Argumentation Methods (SCAMs): Science and the Politics of Doubt |url=http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/students/envs_5720/freudenberg_etal_2008.pdf |url-status=live |journal=Sociological Inquiry |volume=78 |issue=1 |pages=2–38 |doi=10.1111/j.1475-682X.2008.00219.x |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201126214329/http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/students/envs_5720/freudenberg_etal_2008.pdf |archive-date=26 November 2020 |access-date=12 April 2020 |doi-access=free}}</ref> Examples of issues that have involved the politicisation of science include the ], ], and ].<ref name="Freudenberg2008" /><ref>{{cite journal |last1=van der Linden |first1=Sander |last2=Leiserowitz |first2=Anthony |last3=Rosenthal |first3=Seth |last4=Maibach |first4=Edward |year=2017 |title=Inoculating the Public against Misinformation about Climate Change |url=https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/bitstream/1810/270860/1/global%20challenges.pdf |url-status=live |journal=Global Challenges |volume=1 |issue=2 |page=1 |doi=10.1002/gch2.201600008 |pmc=6607159 |pmid=31565263 |bibcode=2017GloCh...100008V |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200404185312/https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/1810/270860/global%20challenges.pdf?sequence=1 |archive-date=4 April 2020 |access-date=25 August 2019}}</ref> | |||
] | |||
] | |||
== See also == | |||
] | |||
* ] | |||
] | |||
* ] | |||
] | |||
* ] | |||
] | |||
* ] | |||
] | |||
* ] (Wikiversity) | |||
] | |||
* ] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
== Notes == | |||
] | |||
{{notelist}} | |||
] | |||
] | |||
==References== | |||
] | |||
{{Reflist}} | |||
] | |||
] | |||
==External links== | |||
] | |||
{{wiktionary|science}} | |||
] | |||
{{Philosophy of science}} | |||
] | |||
{{Glossaries of science and engineering}} | |||
] | |||
{{Science and technology studies}} | |||
] | |||
{{Subject bar|auto=1|portal1=Science}} | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | ] | ||
] | ] | ||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] |
Revision as of 16:22, 12 December 2024
Systematic endeavour to gain knowledge For the journal, see Science (journal). For a topical guide, see Outline of science. For other uses, see Science (disambiguation).
Part of a series on |
Science |
---|
General |
Branches |
In society |
Science is a systematic discipline that builds and organises knowledge in the form of testable hypotheses and predictions about the universe. Modern science is typically divided into two or three major branches: the natural sciences (e.g., physics, chemistry, and biology), which study the physical world; and the behavioural sciences (e.g., economics, psychology, and sociology), which study individuals and societies. The formal sciences (e.g., logic, mathematics, and theoretical computer science), which study formal systems governed by axioms and rules, are sometimes described as being sciences as well; however, they are often regarded as a separate field because they rely on deductive reasoning instead of the scientific method or empirical evidence as their main methodology. Applied sciences are disciplines that use scientific knowledge for practical purposes, such as engineering and medicine.
The history of science spans the majority of the historical record, with the earliest identifiable predecessors to modern science dating to the Bronze Age in Egypt and Mesopotamia (c. 3000–1200 BCE). Their contributions to mathematics, astronomy, and medicine entered and shaped the Greek natural philosophy of classical antiquity, whereby formal attempts were made to provide explanations of events in the physical world based on natural causes, while further advancements, including the introduction of the Hindu–Arabic numeral system, were made during the Golden Age of India. Scientific research deteriorated in these regions after the fall of the Western Roman Empire during the Early Middle Ages (400–1000 CE), but in the Medieval renaissances (Carolingian Renaissance, Ottonian Renaissance and the Renaissance of the 12th century) scholarship flourished again. Some Greek manuscripts lost in Western Europe were preserved and expanded upon in the Middle East during the Islamic Golden Age, along with the later efforts of Byzantine Greek scholars who brought Greek manuscripts from the dying Byzantine Empire to Western Europe at the start of the Renaissance.
The recovery and assimilation of Greek works and Islamic inquiries into Western Europe from the 10th to 13th centuries revived natural philosophy, which was later transformed by the Scientific Revolution that began in the 16th century as new ideas and discoveries departed from previous Greek conceptions and traditions. The scientific method soon played a greater role in knowledge creation and it was not until the 19th century that many of the institutional and professional features of science began to take shape, along with the changing of "natural philosophy" to "natural science".
New knowledge in science is advanced by research from scientists who are motivated by curiosity about the world and a desire to solve problems. Contemporary scientific research is highly collaborative and is usually done by teams in academic and research institutions, government agencies, and companies. The practical impact of their work has led to the emergence of science policies that seek to influence the scientific enterprise by prioritising the ethical and moral development of commercial products, armaments, health care, public infrastructure, and environmental protection.
Etymology
The word science has been used in Middle English since the 14th century in the sense of "the state of knowing". The word was borrowed from the Anglo-Norman language as the suffix -cience, which was borrowed from the Latin word scientia, meaning "knowledge, awareness, understanding". It is a noun derivative of the Latin sciens meaning "knowing", and undisputedly derived from the Latin sciō, the present participle scīre, meaning "to know".
There are many hypotheses for science's ultimate word origin. According to Michiel de Vaan, Dutch linguist and Indo-Europeanist, sciō may have its origin in the Proto-Italic language as *skije- or *skijo- meaning "to know", which may originate from Proto-Indo-European language as *skh1-ie, *skh1-io, meaning "to incise". The Lexikon der indogermanischen Verben proposed sciō is a back-formation of nescīre, meaning "to not know, be unfamiliar with", which may derive from Proto-Indo-European *sekH- in Latin secāre, or *skh2-, from *sḱʰeh2(i)- meaning "to cut".
In the past, science was a synonym for "knowledge" or "study", in keeping with its Latin origin. A person who conducted scientific research was called a "natural philosopher" or "man of science". In 1834, William Whewell introduced the term scientist in a review of Mary Somerville's book On the Connexion of the Physical Sciences, crediting it to "some ingenious gentleman" (possibly himself).
History
Main article: History of scienceEarly history
Main article: Science in the ancient worldScience has no single origin. Rather, scientific thinking emerged gradually over the course of tens of thousands of years, taking different forms around the world, and few details are known about the very earliest developments. Women likely played a central role in prehistoric science, as did religious rituals. Some scholars use the term "protoscience" to label activities in the past that resemble modern science in some but not all features; however, this label has also been criticised as denigrating, or too suggestive of presentism, thinking about those activities only in relation to modern categories.
Direct evidence for scientific processes becomes clearer with the advent of writing systems in the Bronze Age civilisations of Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia (c. 3000–1200 BCE), creating the earliest written records in the history of science. Although the words and concepts of "science" and "nature" were not part of the conceptual landscape at the time, the ancient Egyptians and Mesopotamians made contributions that would later find a place in Greek and medieval science: mathematics, astronomy, and medicine. From the 3rd millennium BCE, the ancient Egyptians developed a non-positional decimal numbering system, solved practical problems using geometry, and developed a calendar. Their healing therapies involved drug treatments and the supernatural, such as prayers, incantations, and rituals.
The ancient Mesopotamians used knowledge about the properties of various natural chemicals for manufacturing pottery, faience, glass, soap, metals, lime plaster, and waterproofing. They studied animal physiology, anatomy, behaviour, and astrology for divinatory purposes. The Mesopotamians had an intense interest in medicine and the earliest medical prescriptions appeared in Sumerian during the Third Dynasty of Ur. They seem to have studied scientific subjects which had practical or religious applications and had little interest in satisfying curiosity.
Classical antiquity
Main article: Science in classical antiquityIn classical antiquity, there is no real ancient analogue of a modern scientist. Instead, well-educated, usually upper-class, and almost universally male individuals performed various investigations into nature whenever they could afford the time. Before the invention or discovery of the concept of phusis or nature by the pre-Socratic philosophers, the same words tend to be used to describe the natural "way" in which a plant grows, and the "way" in which, for example, one tribe worships a particular god. For this reason, it is claimed that these men were the first philosophers in the strict sense and the first to clearly distinguish "nature" and "convention".
The early Greek philosophers of the Milesian school, which was founded by Thales of Miletus and later continued by his successors Anaximander and Anaximenes, were the first to attempt to explain natural phenomena without relying on the supernatural. The Pythagoreans developed a complex number philosophy and contributed significantly to the development of mathematical science. The theory of atoms was developed by the Greek philosopher Leucippus and his student Democritus. Later, Epicurus would develop a full natural cosmology based on atomism, and would adopt a "canon" (ruler, standard) which established physical criteria or standards of scientific truth. The Greek doctor Hippocrates established the tradition of systematic medical science and is known as "The Father of Medicine".
A turning point in the history of early philosophical science was Socrates' example of applying philosophy to the study of human matters, including human nature, the nature of political communities, and human knowledge itself. The Socratic method as documented by Plato's dialogues is a dialectic method of hypothesis elimination: better hypotheses are found by steadily identifying and eliminating those that lead to contradictions. The Socratic method searches for general commonly-held truths that shape beliefs and scrutinises them for consistency. Socrates criticised the older type of study of physics as too purely speculative and lacking in self-criticism.
In the 4th century BCE, Aristotle created a systematic programme of teleological philosophy. In the 3rd century BCE, Greek astronomer Aristarchus of Samos was the first to propose a heliocentric model of the universe, with the Sun at the centre and all the planets orbiting it. Aristarchus's model was widely rejected because it was believed to violate the laws of physics, while Ptolemy's Almagest, which contains a geocentric description of the Solar System, was accepted through the early Renaissance instead. The inventor and mathematician Archimedes of Syracuse made major contributions to the beginnings of calculus. Pliny the Elder was a Roman writer and polymath, who wrote the seminal encyclopaedia Natural History.
Positional notation for representing numbers likely emerged between the 3rd and 5th centuries CE along Indian trade routes. This numeral system made efficient arithmetic operations more accessible and would eventually become standard for mathematics worldwide.
Middle Ages
Main article: History of science § Middle AgesDue to the collapse of the Western Roman Empire, the 5th century saw an intellectual decline, with knowledge of classical Greek conceptions of the world deteriorating in Western Europe. Latin encyclopaedists of the period such as Isidore of Seville preserved the majority of general ancient knowledge. In contrast, because the Byzantine Empire resisted attacks from invaders, they were able to preserve and improve prior learning. John Philoponus, a Byzantine scholar in the 6th century, started to question Aristotle's teaching of physics, introducing the theory of impetus. His criticism served as an inspiration to medieval scholars and Galileo Galilei, who extensively cited his works ten centuries later.
During late antiquity and the Early Middle Ages, natural phenomena were mainly examined via the Aristotelian approach. The approach includes Aristotle's four causes: material, formal, moving, and final cause. Many Greek classical texts were preserved by the Byzantine Empire and Arabic translations were done by groups such as the Nestorians and the Monophysites. Under the Abbasids, these Arabic translations were later improved and developed by Arabic scientists. By the 6th and 7th centuries, the neighbouring Sasanian Empire established the medical Academy of Gondishapur, which was considered by Greek, Syriac, and Persian physicians as the most important medical hub of the ancient world.
Islamic study of Aristotelianism flourished in the House of Wisdom established in the Abbasid capital of Baghdad, Iraq and the flourished until the Mongol invasions in the 13th century. Ibn al-Haytham, better known as Alhazen, used controlled experiments in his optical study. Avicenna's compilation of The Canon of Medicine, a medical encyclopaedia, is considered to be one of the most important publications in medicine and was used until the 18th century.
By the 11th century, most of Europe had become Christian, and in 1088, the University of Bologna emerged as the first university in Europe. As such, demand for Latin translation of ancient and scientific texts grew, a major contributor to the Renaissance of the 12th century. Renaissance scholasticism in western Europe flourished, with experiments done by observing, describing, and classifying subjects in nature. In the 13th century, medical teachers and students at Bologna began opening human bodies, leading to the first anatomy textbook based on human dissection by Mondino de Luzzi.
Renaissance
Main articles: Scientific Revolution and Science in the RenaissanceNew developments in optics played a role in the inception of the Renaissance, both by challenging long-held metaphysical ideas on perception, as well as by contributing to the improvement and development of technology such as the camera obscura and the telescope. At the start of the Renaissance, Roger Bacon, Vitello, and John Peckham each built up a scholastic ontology upon a causal chain beginning with sensation, perception, and finally apperception of the individual and universal forms of Aristotle. A model of vision later known as perspectivism was exploited and studied by the artists of the Renaissance. This theory uses only three of Aristotle's four causes: formal, material, and final.
In the 16th century, Nicolaus Copernicus formulated a heliocentric model of the Solar System, stating that the planets revolve around the Sun, instead of the geocentric model where the planets and the Sun revolve around the Earth. This was based on a theorem that the orbital periods of the planets are longer as their orbs are farther from the centre of motion, which he found not to agree with Ptolemy's model.
Johannes Kepler and others challenged the notion that the only function of the eye is perception, and shifted the main focus in optics from the eye to the propagation of light. Kepler is best known, however, for improving Copernicus' heliocentric model through the discovery of Kepler's laws of planetary motion. Kepler did not reject Aristotelian metaphysics and described his work as a search for the Harmony of the Spheres. Galileo had made significant contributions to astronomy, physics and engineering. However, he became persecuted after Pope Urban VIII sentenced him for writing about the heliocentric model.
The printing press was widely used to publish scholarly arguments, including some that disagreed widely with contemporary ideas of nature. Francis Bacon and René Descartes published philosophical arguments in favour of a new type of non-Aristotelian science. Bacon emphasised the importance of experiment over contemplation, questioned the Aristotelian concepts of formal and final cause, promoted the idea that science should study the laws of nature and the improvement of all human life. Descartes emphasised individual thought and argued that mathematics rather than geometry should be used to study nature.
Age of Enlightenment
Main article: Science in the Age of EnlightenmentAt the start of the Age of Enlightenment, Isaac Newton formed the foundation of classical mechanics by his Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica, greatly influencing future physicists. Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz incorporated terms from Aristotelian physics, now used in a new non-teleological way. This implied a shift in the view of objects: objects were now considered as having no innate goals. Leibniz assumed that different types of things all work according to the same general laws of nature, with no special formal or final causes.
During this time the declared purpose and value of science became producing wealth and inventions that would improve human lives, in the materialistic sense of having more food, clothing, and other things. In Bacon's words, "the real and legitimate goal of sciences is the endowment of human life with new inventions and riches", and he discouraged scientists from pursuing intangible philosophical or spiritual ideas, which he believed contributed little to human happiness beyond "the fume of subtle, sublime or pleasing ".
Science during the Enlightenment was dominated by scientific societies and academies, which had largely replaced universities as centres of scientific research and development. Societies and academies were the backbones of the maturation of the scientific profession. Another important development was the popularisation of science among an increasingly literate population. Enlightenment philosophers turned to a few of their scientific predecessors – Galileo, Kepler, Boyle, and Newton principally – as the guides to every physical and social field of the day.
The 18th century saw significant advancements in the practice of medicine and physics; the development of biological taxonomy by Carl Linnaeus; a new understanding of magnetism and electricity; and the maturation of chemistry as a discipline. Ideas on human nature, society, and economics evolved during the Enlightenment. Hume and other Scottish Enlightenment thinkers developed A Treatise of Human Nature, which was expressed historically in works by authors including James Burnett, Adam Ferguson, John Millar and William Robertson, all of whom merged a scientific study of how humans behaved in ancient and primitive cultures with a strong awareness of the determining forces of modernity. Modern sociology largely originated from this movement. In 1776, Adam Smith published The Wealth of Nations, which is often considered the first work on modern economics.
19th century
Main article: 19th century in scienceDuring the 19th century, many distinguishing characteristics of contemporary modern science began to take shape. These included the transformation of the life and physical sciences; the frequent use of precision instruments; the emergence of terms such as "biologist", "physicist", and "scientist"; an increased professionalisation of those studying nature; scientists gaining cultural authority over many dimensions of society; the industrialisation of numerous countries; the thriving of popular science writings; and the emergence of science journals. During the late 19th century, psychology emerged as a separate discipline from philosophy when Wilhelm Wundt founded the first laboratory for psychological research in 1879.
During the mid-19th century Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace independently proposed the theory of evolution by natural selection in 1858, which explained how different plants and animals originated and evolved. Their theory was set out in detail in Darwin's book On the Origin of Species, published in 1859. Separately, Gregor Mendel presented his paper, "Experiments on Plant Hybridisation" in 1865, which outlined the principles of biological inheritance, serving as the basis for modern genetics.
Early in the 19th century John Dalton suggested the modern atomic theory, based on Democritus's original idea of indivisible particles called atoms. The laws of conservation of energy, conservation of momentum and conservation of mass suggested a highly stable universe where there could be little loss of resources. However, with the advent of the steam engine and the Industrial Revolution there was an increased understanding that not all forms of energy have the same energy qualities, the ease of conversion to useful work or to another form of energy. This realisation led to the development of the laws of thermodynamics, in which the free energy of the universe is seen as constantly declining: the entropy of a closed universe increases over time.
The electromagnetic theory was established in the 19th century by the works of Hans Christian Ørsted, André-Marie Ampère, Michael Faraday, James Clerk Maxwell, Oliver Heaviside, and Heinrich Hertz. The new theory raised questions that could not easily be answered using Newton's framework. The discovery of X-rays inspired the discovery of radioactivity by Henri Becquerel and Marie Curie in 1896, Marie Curie then became the first person to win two Nobel Prizes. In the next year came the discovery of the first subatomic particle, the electron.
20th century
Main article: 20th century in scienceIn the first half of the century the development of antibiotics and artificial fertilisers improved human living standards globally. Harmful environmental issues such as ozone depletion, ocean acidification, eutrophication, and climate change came to the public's attention and caused the onset of environmental studies.
During this period scientific experimentation became increasingly larger in scale and funding. The extensive technological innovation stimulated by World War I, World War II, and the Cold War led to competitions between global powers, such as the Space Race and nuclear arms race. Substantial international collaborations were also made, despite armed conflicts.
In the late 20th century active recruitment of women and elimination of sex discrimination greatly increased the number of women scientists, but large gender disparities remained in some fields. The discovery of the cosmic microwave background in 1964 led to a rejection of the steady-state model of the universe in favour of the Big Bang theory of Georges Lemaître.
The century saw fundamental changes within science disciplines. Evolution became a unified theory in the early 20th-century when the modern synthesis reconciled Darwinian evolution with classical genetics. Albert Einstein's theory of relativity and the development of quantum mechanics complement classical mechanics to describe physics in extreme length, time and gravity. Widespread use of integrated circuits in the last quarter of the 20th century combined with communications satellites led to a revolution in information technology and the rise of the global internet and mobile computing, including smartphones. The need for mass systematisation of long, intertwined causal chains and large amounts of data led to the rise of the fields of systems theory and computer-assisted scientific modelling.
21st century
Main article: 21st century § Science and technologyThe Human Genome Project was completed in 2003 by identifying and mapping all of the genes of the human genome. The first induced pluripotent human stem cells were made in 2006, allowing adult cells to be transformed into stem cells and turn into any cell type found in the body. With the affirmation of the Higgs boson discovery in 2013, the last particle predicted by the Standard Model of particle physics was found. In 2015, gravitational waves, predicted by general relativity a century before, were first observed. In 2019, the international collaboration Event Horizon Telescope presented the first direct image of a black hole's accretion disc.
Branches
Main article: Branches of scienceModern science is commonly divided into three major branches: natural science, social science, and formal science. Each of these branches comprises various specialised yet overlapping scientific disciplines that often possess their own nomenclature and expertise. Both natural and social sciences are empirical sciences, as their knowledge is based on empirical observations and is capable of being tested for its validity by other researchers working under the same conditions.
Natural science
Natural science is the study of the physical world. It can be divided into two main branches: life science and physical science. These two branches may be further divided into more specialised disciplines. For example, physical science can be subdivided into physics, chemistry, astronomy, and earth science. Modern natural science is the successor to the natural philosophy that began in Ancient Greece. Galileo, Descartes, Bacon, and Newton debated the benefits of using approaches that were more mathematical and more experimental in a methodical way. Still, philosophical perspectives, conjectures, and presuppositions, often overlooked, remain necessary in natural science. Systematic data collection, including discovery science, succeeded natural history, which emerged in the 16th century by describing and classifying plants, animals, minerals, and other biotic beings. Today, "natural history" suggests observational descriptions aimed at popular audiences.
Social science
Social science is the study of human behaviour and the functioning of societies. It has many disciplines that include, but are not limited to anthropology, economics, history, human geography, political science, psychology, and sociology. In the social sciences, there are many competing theoretical perspectives, many of which are extended through competing research programmes such as the functionalists, conflict theorists, and interactionists in sociology. Due to the limitations of conducting controlled experiments involving large groups of individuals or complex situations, social scientists may adopt other research methods such as the historical method, case studies, and cross-cultural studies. Moreover, if quantitative information is available, social scientists may rely on statistical approaches to better understand social relationships and processes.
Formal science
Formal science is an area of study that generates knowledge using formal systems. A formal system is an abstract structure used for inferring theorems from axioms according to a set of rules. It includes mathematics, systems theory, and theoretical computer science. The formal sciences share similarities with the other two branches by relying on objective, careful, and systematic study of an area of knowledge. They are, however, different from the empirical sciences as they rely exclusively on deductive reasoning, without the need for empirical evidence, to verify their abstract concepts. The formal sciences are therefore a priori disciplines and because of this, there is disagreement on whether they constitute a science. Nevertheless, the formal sciences play an important role in the empirical sciences. Calculus, for example, was initially invented to understand motion in physics. Natural and social sciences that rely heavily on mathematical applications include mathematical physics, chemistry, biology, finance, and economics.
Applied science
Applied science is the use of the scientific method and knowledge to attain practical goals and includes a broad range of disciplines such as engineering and medicine. Engineering is the use of scientific principles to invent, design and build machines, structures and technologies. Science may contribute to the development of new technologies. Medicine is the practice of caring for patients by maintaining and restoring health through the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of injury or disease. The applied sciences are often contrasted with the basic sciences, which are focused on advancing scientific theories and laws that explain and predict events in the natural world.
Computational science applies computing power to simulate real-world situations, enabling a better understanding of scientific problems than formal mathematics alone can achieve. The use of machine learning and artificial intelligence is becoming a central feature of computational contributions to science, for example in agent-based computational economics, random forests, topic modeling and various forms of prediction. However, machines alone rarely advance knowledge as they require human guidance and capacity to reason; and they can introduce bias against certain social groups or sometimes underperform against humans.
Interdisciplinary science
Interdisciplinary science involves the combination of two or more disciplines into one, such as bioinformatics, a combination of biology and computer science or cognitive sciences. The concept has existed since the ancient Greek period and it became popular again in the 20th century.
Scientific research
Scientific research can be labelled as either basic or applied research. Basic research is the search for knowledge and applied research is the search for solutions to practical problems using this knowledge. Most understanding comes from basic research, though sometimes applied research targets specific practical problems. This leads to technological advances that were not previously imaginable.
Scientific method
Scientific research involves using the scientific method, which seeks to objectively explain the events of nature in a reproducible way. Scientists usually take for granted a set of basic assumptions that are needed to justify the scientific method: there is an objective reality shared by all rational observers; this objective reality is governed by natural laws; these laws were discovered by means of systematic observation and experimentation. Mathematics is essential in the formation of hypotheses, theories, and laws, because it is used extensively in quantitative modelling, observing, and collecting measurements. Statistics is used to summarise and analyse data, which allows scientists to assess the reliability of experimental results.
In the scientific method an explanatory thought experiment or hypothesis is put forward as an explanation using parsimony principles and is expected to seek consilience – fitting with other accepted facts related to an observation or scientific question. This tentative explanation is used to make falsifiable predictions, which are typically posted before being tested by experimentation. Disproof of a prediction is evidence of progress. Experimentation is especially important in science to help establish causal relationships to avoid the correlation fallacy, though in some sciences such as astronomy or geology, a predicted observation might be more appropriate.
When a hypothesis proves unsatisfactory it is modified or discarded. If the hypothesis survives testing, it may become adopted into the framework of a scientific theory, a validly reasoned, self-consistent model or framework for describing the behaviour of certain natural events. A theory typically describes the behaviour of much broader sets of observations than a hypothesis; commonly, a large number of hypotheses can be logically bound together by a single theory. Thus, a theory is a hypothesis explaining various other hypotheses. In that vein, theories are formulated according to most of the same scientific principles as hypotheses. Scientists may generate a model, an attempt to describe or depict an observation in terms of a logical, physical or mathematical representation, and to generate new hypotheses that can be tested by experimentation.
While performing experiments to test hypotheses, scientists may have a preference for one outcome over another. Eliminating the bias can be achieved through transparency, careful experimental design, and a thorough peer review process of the experimental results and conclusions. After the results of an experiment are announced or published, it is normal practice for independent researchers to double-check how the research was performed, and to follow up by performing similar experiments to determine how dependable the results might be. Taken in its entirety, the scientific method allows for highly creative problem solving while minimising the effects of subjective and confirmation bias. Intersubjective verifiability, the ability to reach a consensus and reproduce results, is fundamental to the creation of all scientific knowledge.
Scientific literature
Main articles: Scientific literature and Lists of important publications in scienceScientific research is published in a range of literature. Scientific journals communicate and document the results of research carried out in universities and various other research institutions, serving as an archival record of science. The first scientific journals, Journal des sçavans followed by Philosophical Transactions, began publication in 1665. Since that time the total number of active periodicals has steadily increased. In 1981, one estimate for the number of scientific and technical journals in publication was 11,500.
Most scientific journals cover a single scientific field and publish the research within that field; the research is normally expressed in the form of a scientific paper. Science has become so pervasive in modern societies that it is considered necessary to communicate the achievements, news, and ambitions of scientists to a wider population.
Challenges
The replication crisis is an ongoing methodological crisis that affects parts of the social and life sciences. In subsequent investigations, the results of many scientific studies have been proven to be unrepeatable. The crisis has long-standing roots; the phrase was coined in the early 2010s as part of a growing awareness of the problem. The replication crisis represents an important body of research in metascience, which aims to improve the quality of all scientific research while reducing waste.
An area of study or speculation that masquerades as science in an attempt to claim legitimacy that it would not otherwise be able to achieve is sometimes referred to as pseudoscience, fringe science, or junk science. Physicist Richard Feynman coined the term "cargo cult science" for cases in which researchers believe, and at a glance, look like they are doing science but lack the honesty to allow their results to be rigorously evaluated. Various types of commercial advertising, ranging from hype to fraud, may fall into these categories. Science has been described as "the most important tool" for separating valid claims from invalid ones.
There can also be an element of political or ideological bias on all sides of scientific debates. Sometimes, research may be characterised as "bad science", research that may be well-intended but is incorrect, obsolete, incomplete, or over-simplified expositions of scientific ideas. The term "scientific misconduct" refers to situations such as where researchers have intentionally misrepresented their published data or have purposely given credit for a discovery to the wrong person.
Philosophy of science
There are different schools of thought in the philosophy of science. The most popular position is empiricism, which holds that knowledge is created by a process involving observation; scientific theories generalise observations. Empiricism generally encompasses inductivism, a position that explains how general theories can be made from the finite amount of empirical evidence available. Many versions of empiricism exist, with the predominant ones being Bayesianism and the hypothetico-deductive method.
Empiricism has stood in contrast to rationalism, the position originally associated with Descartes, which holds that knowledge is created by the human intellect, not by observation. Critical rationalism is a contrasting 20th-century approach to science, first defined by Austrian-British philosopher Karl Popper. Popper rejected the way that empiricism describes the connection between theory and observation. He claimed that theories are not generated by observation, but that observation is made in the light of theories, and that the only way theory A can be affected by observation is after theory A were to conflict with observation, but theory B were to survive the observation. Popper proposed replacing verifiability with falsifiability as the landmark of scientific theories, replacing induction with falsification as the empirical method. Popper further claimed that there is actually only one universal method, not specific to science: the negative method of criticism, trial and error, covering all products of the human mind, including science, mathematics, philosophy, and art.
Another approach, instrumentalism, emphasises the utility of theories as instruments for explaining and predicting phenomena. It views scientific theories as black boxes, with only their input (initial conditions) and output (predictions) being relevant. Consequences, theoretical entities, and logical structure are claimed to be things that should be ignored. Close to instrumentalism is constructive empiricism, according to which the main criterion for the success of a scientific theory is whether what it says about observable entities is true.
Thomas Kuhn argued that the process of observation and evaluation takes place within a paradigm, a logically consistent "portrait" of the world that is consistent with observations made from its framing. He characterised normal science as the process of observation and "puzzle solving", which takes place within a paradigm, whereas revolutionary science occurs when one paradigm overtakes another in a paradigm shift. Each paradigm has its own distinct questions, aims, and interpretations. The choice between paradigms involves setting two or more "portraits" against the world and deciding which likeness is most promising. A paradigm shift occurs when a significant number of observational anomalies arise in the old paradigm and a new paradigm makes sense of them. That is, the choice of a new paradigm is based on observations, even though those observations are made against the background of the old paradigm. For Kuhn, acceptance or rejection of a paradigm is a social process as much as a logical process. Kuhn's position, however, is not one of relativism.
Another approach often cited in debates of scientific scepticism against controversial movements like "creation science" is methodological naturalism. Naturalists maintain that a difference should be made between natural and supernatural, and science should be restricted to natural explanations. Methodological naturalism maintains that science requires strict adherence to empirical study and independent verification.
Scientific community
The scientific community is a network of interacting scientists who conduct scientific research. The community consists of smaller groups working in scientific fields. By having peer review, through discussion and debate within journals and conferences, scientists maintain the quality of research methodology and objectivity when interpreting results.
Scientists
Scientists are individuals who conduct scientific research to advance knowledge in an area of interest. In modern times, many professional scientists are trained in an academic setting and, upon completion, attain an academic degree, with the highest degree being a doctorate (e.g. a Doctor of Philosophy, or PhD). Many scientists pursue careers in various sectors of the economy such as academia, industry, government, and nonprofit organisations.
Scientists exhibit a strong curiosity about reality and a desire to apply scientific knowledge for the benefit of health, nations, the environment, or industries. Other motivations include recognition by their peers and prestige. In modern times, many scientists have advanced degrees in an area of science and pursue careers in various sectors of the economy, such as academia, industry, government, and nonprofit environments.
Science has historically been a male-dominated field, with notable exceptions. Women in science faced considerable discrimination in science, much as they did in other areas of male-dominated societies. For example, women were frequently passed over for job opportunities and denied credit for their work. The achievements of women in science have been attributed to the defiance of their traditional role as labourers within the domestic sphere.
Learned societies
Learned societies for the communication and promotion of scientific thought and experimentation have existed since the Renaissance. Many scientists belong to a learned society that promotes their respective scientific discipline, profession, or group of related disciplines. Membership may either be open to all, require possession of scientific credentials, or conferred by election. Most scientific societies are nonprofit organisations, and many are professional associations. Their activities typically include holding regular conferences for the presentation and discussion of new research results and publishing or sponsoring academic journals in their discipline. Some societies act as professional bodies, regulating the activities of their members in the public interest, or the collective interest of the membership.
The professionalisation of science, begun in the 19th century, was partly enabled by the creation of national distinguished academies of sciences such as the Italian Accademia dei Lincei in 1603, the British Royal Society in 1660, the French Academy of Sciences in 1666, the American National Academy of Sciences in 1863, the German Kaiser Wilhelm Society in 1911, and the Chinese Academy of Sciences in 1949. International scientific organisations, such as the International Science Council, are devoted to international cooperation for science advancement.
Awards
Science awards are usually given to individuals or organisations that have made significant contributions to a discipline. They are often given by prestigious institutions; thus, it is considered a great honour for a scientist receiving them. Since the early Renaissance, scientists have often been awarded medals, money, and titles. The Nobel Prize, a widely regarded prestigious award, is awarded annually to those who have achieved scientific advances in the fields of medicine, physics, and chemistry.
Society
"Science and society" redirects here. Not to be confused with Science & Society or Sociology of scientific knowledge.Funding and policies
Scientific research is often funded through a competitive process in which potential research projects are evaluated and only the most promising receive funding. Such processes, which are run by government, corporations, or foundations, allocate scarce funds. Total research funding in most developed countries is between 1.5% and 3% of GDP. In the OECD, around two-thirds of research and development in scientific and technical fields is carried out by industry, and 20% and 10%, respectively, by universities and government. The government funding proportion in certain fields is higher, and it dominates research in social science and the humanities. In less developed nations, the government provides the bulk of the funds for their basic scientific research.
Many governments have dedicated agencies to support scientific research, such as the National Science Foundation in the United States, the National Scientific and Technical Research Council in Argentina, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation in Australia, National Centre for Scientific Research in France, the Max Planck Society in Germany, and National Research Council in Spain. In commercial research and development, all but the most research-orientated corporations focus more heavily on near-term commercialisation possibilities than research driven by curiosity.
Science policy is concerned with policies that affect the conduct of the scientific enterprise, including research funding, often in pursuance of other national policy goals such as technological innovation to promote commercial product development, weapons development, health care, and environmental monitoring. Science policy sometimes refers to the act of applying scientific knowledge and consensus to the development of public policies. In accordance with public policy being concerned about the well-being of its citizens, science policy's goal is to consider how science and technology can best serve the public. Public policy can directly affect the funding of capital equipment and intellectual infrastructure for industrial research by providing tax incentives to those organisations that fund research.
Education and awareness
Main articles: Public awareness of science and Science journalismScience education for the general public is embedded in the school curriculum, and is supplemented by online pedagogical content (for example, YouTube and Khan Academy), museums, and science magazines and blogs. Major organisations of scientists such as the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) consider the sciences to be a part of the liberal arts traditions of learning, along with philosophy and history. Scientific literacy is chiefly concerned with an understanding of the scientific method, units and methods of measurement, empiricism, a basic understanding of statistics (correlations, qualitative versus quantitative observations, aggregate statistics), and a basic understanding of core scientific fields such as physics, chemistry, biology, ecology, geology, and computation. As a student advances into higher stages of formal education, the curriculum becomes more in depth. Traditional subjects usually included in the curriculum are natural and formal sciences, although recent movements include social and applied science as well.
The mass media face pressures that can prevent them from accurately depicting competing scientific claims in terms of their credibility within the scientific community as a whole. Determining how much weight to give different sides in a scientific debate may require considerable expertise regarding the matter. Few journalists have real scientific knowledge, and even beat reporters who are knowledgeable about certain scientific issues may be ignorant about other scientific issues that they are suddenly asked to cover.
Science magazines such as New Scientist, Science & Vie, and Scientific American cater to the needs of a much wider readership and provide a non-technical summary of popular areas of research, including notable discoveries and advances in certain fields of research. The science fiction genre, primarily speculative fiction, can transmit the ideas and methods of science to the general public. Recent efforts to intensify or develop links between science and non-scientific disciplines, such as literature or poetry, include the Creative Writing Science resource developed through the Royal Literary Fund.
Anti-science attitudes
Main article: AntiscienceWhile the scientific method is broadly accepted in the scientific community, some fractions of society reject certain scientific positions or are sceptical about science. Examples are the common notion that COVID-19 is not a major health threat to the US (held by 39% of Americans in August 2021) or the belief that climate change is not a major threat to the US (also held by 40% of Americans, in late 2019 and early 2020). Psychologists have pointed to four factors driving rejection of scientific results:
- Scientific authorities are sometimes seen as inexpert, untrustworthy, or biased.
- Some marginalised social groups hold anti-science attitudes, in part because these groups have often been exploited in unethical experiments.
- Messages from scientists may contradict deeply held existing beliefs or morals.
- The delivery of a scientific message may not be appropriately targeted to a recipient's learning style.
Anti-science attitudes often seem to be caused by fear of rejection in social groups. For instance, climate change is perceived as a threat by only 22% of Americans on the right side of the political spectrum, but by 85% on the left. That is, if someone on the left would not consider climate change as a threat, this person may face contempt and be rejected in that social group. In fact, people may rather deny a scientifically accepted fact than lose or jeopardise their social status.
Politics
Attitudes towards science are often determined by political opinions and goals. Government, business and advocacy groups have been known to use legal and economic pressure to influence scientific researchers. Many factors can act as facets of the politicisation of science such as anti-intellectualism, perceived threats to religious beliefs, and fear for business interests. Politicisation of science is usually accomplished when scientific information is presented in a way that emphasises the uncertainty associated with the scientific evidence. Tactics such as shifting conversation, failing to acknowledge facts, and capitalising on doubt of scientific consensus have been used to gain more attention for views that have been undermined by scientific evidence. Examples of issues that have involved the politicisation of science include the global warming controversy, health effects of pesticides, and health effects of tobacco.
See also
- Criticism of science
- List of scientific occupations
- List of years in science
- Logology (science)
- Science (Wikiversity)
- Scientific integrity
Notes
- Ibn al-Haytham's Book of Optics Book I, . pages 372 and 408 disputed Claudius Ptolemy's extramission theory of vision; "Hence, the extramission of rays is superfluous and useless". —A.Mark Smith's translation of the Latin version of Ibn al-Haytham.
- Whether the universe is closed or open, or the shape of the universe, is an open question. The 2nd law of thermodynamics, and the 3rd law of thermodynamics imply the heat death of the universe if the universe is a closed system, but not necessarily for an expanding universe.
References
- Wilson, E. O. (1999). "The natural sciences". Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge (Reprint ed.). New York: Vintage. pp. 49–71. ISBN 978-0-679-76867-8.
- ^ Heilbron, J. L.; et al. (2003). "Preface". The Oxford Companion to the History of Modern Science. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. vii–x. ISBN 978-0-19-511229-0.
...modern science is a discovery as well as an invention. It was a discovery that nature generally acts regularly enough to be described by laws and even by mathematics; and required invention to devise the techniques, abstractions, apparatus, and organization for exhibiting the regularities and securing their law-like descriptions.
- ^ Cohen, Eliel (2021). "The boundary lens: theorising academic activity". The University and its Boundaries: Thriving or Surviving in the 21st Century. New York: Routledge. pp. 14–41. ISBN 978-0-367-56298-4. Retrieved 4 May 2021.
- ^ Colander, David C.; Hunt, Elgin F. (2019). "Social science and its methods". Social Science: An Introduction to the Study of Society (17th ed.). New York: Routledge. pp. 1–22.
- ^ Nisbet, Robert A.; Greenfeld, Liah (16 October 2020). "Social Science". Encyclopædia Britannica. Archived from the original on 2 February 2022. Retrieved 9 May 2021.
- ^ Löwe, Benedikt (2002). "The formal sciences: their scope, their foundations, and their unity". Synthese. 133 (1/2): 5–11. doi:10.1023/A:1020887832028. ISSN 0039-7857. S2CID 9272212.
- ^ Rucker, Rudy (2019). "Robots and souls". Infinity and the Mind: The Science and Philosophy of the Infinite (Reprint ed.). Princeton University Press. pp. 157–188. ISBN 978-0-691-19138-6. Archived from the original on 26 February 2021. Retrieved 11 May 2021.
- ^ Fetzer, James H. (2013). "Computer reliability and public policy: Limits of knowledge of computer-based systems". Computers and Cognition: Why Minds are not Machines. Newcastle, United Kingdom: Kluwer. pp. 271–308. ISBN 978-1-4438-1946-6.
- Nickles, Thomas (2013). "The Problem of Demarcation". Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problem. The University of Chicago Press. p. 104.
- Fischer, M. R.; Fabry, G (2014). "Thinking and acting scientifically: Indispensable basis of medical education". GMS Zeitschrift für Medizinische Ausbildung. 31 (2): Doc24. doi:10.3205/zma000916. PMC 4027809. PMID 24872859.
- Sinclair, Marius (1993). "On the Differences between the Engineering and Scientific Methods". The International Journal of Engineering Education. Archived from the original on 15 November 2017. Retrieved 7 September 2018.
- ^ Bunge, M. (1966). "Technology as Applied Science". In Rapp, F. (ed.). Contributions to a Philosophy of Technology. Dordrecht: Springer. pp. 19–39. doi:10.1007/978-94-010-2182-1_2. ISBN 978-94-010-2184-5. S2CID 110332727.
- ^ Lindberg, David C. (2007). The beginnings of Western science: the European Scientific tradition in philosophical, religious, and institutional context (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press. ISBN 978-0226482057.
- ^ Grant, Edward (2007). "Ancient Egypt to Plato". A History of Natural Philosophy: From the Ancient World to the Nineteenth Century. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 1–26. ISBN 978-0-521-68957-1.
- Building Bridges Among the BRICs Archived 18 April 2023 at the Wayback Machine, p. 125, Robert Crane, Springer, 2014
- Keay, John (2000). India: A history. Atlantic Monthly Press. p. 132. ISBN 978-0-87113-800-2.
The great era of all that is deemed classical in Indian literature, art and science was now dawning. It was this crescendo of creativity and scholarship, as much as ... political achievements of the Guptas, which would make their age so golden.
- Lindberg, David C. (2007). "Islamic science". The beginnings of Western science: the European Scientific tradition in philosophical, religious, and institutional context (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press. pp. 163–192. ISBN 978-0-226-48205-7.
- Lindberg, David C. (2007). "The revival of learning in the West". The beginnings of Western science: the European Scientific tradition in philosophical, religious, and institutional context (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press. pp. 193–224. ISBN 978-0-226-48205-7.
- Lindberg, David C. (2007). "The recovery and assimilation of Greek and Islamic science". The beginnings of Western science: the European Scientific tradition in philosophical, religious, and institutional context (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press. pp. 225–253. ISBN 978-0-226-48205-7.
- Sease, Virginia; Schmidt-Brabant, Manfrid. Thinkers, Saints, Heretics: Spiritual Paths of the Middle Ages. 2007. Pages 80–81. Retrieved 6 October 2023
- Principe, Lawrence M. (2011). "Introduction". Scientific Revolution: A Very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 1–3. ISBN 978-0-19-956741-6.
- Lindberg, David C. (2007). "The legacy of ancient and medieval science". The beginnings of Western science: the European Scientific tradition in philosophical, religious, and institutional context (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press. pp. 357–368. ISBN 978-0-226-48205-7.
- Grant, Edward (2007). "Transformation of medieval natural philosophy from the early period modern period to the end of the nineteenth century". A History of Natural Philosophy: From the Ancient World to the Nineteenth Century. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 274–322. ISBN 978-0-521-68957-1.
- Cahan, David, ed. (2003). From Natural Philosophy to the Sciences: Writing the History of Nineteenth-Century Science. University of Chicago Press. ISBN 978-0-226-08928-7.
- Lightman, Bernard (2011). "13. Science and the Public". In Shank, Michael; Numbers, Ronald; Harrison, Peter (eds.). Wrestling with Nature: From Omens to Science. University of Chicago Press. p. 367. ISBN 978-0-226-31783-0.
- Harrison, Peter (2015). The Territories of Science and Religion. University of Chicago Press. pp. 164–165. ISBN 978-0-226-18451-7.
The changing character of those engaged in scientific endeavors was matched by a new nomenclature for their endeavors. The most conspicuous marker of this change was the replacement of "natural philosophy" by "natural science". In 1800 few had spoken of the "natural sciences" but by 1880 this expression had overtaken the traditional label "natural philosophy". The persistence of "natural philosophy" in the twentieth century is owing largely to historical references to a past practice (see figure 11). As should now be apparent, this was not simply the substitution of one term by another, but involved the jettisoning of a range of personal qualities relating to the conduct of philosophy and the living of the philosophical life.
- MacRitchie, Finlay (2011). "Introduction". Scientific Research as a Career. New York: Routledge. pp. 1–6. ISBN 978-1-4398-6965-9. Retrieved 5 May 2021.
- Marder, Michael P. (2011). "Curiosity and research". Research Methods for Science. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 1–17. ISBN 978-0-521-14584-8. Retrieved 5 May 2021.
- de Ridder, Jeroen (2020). "How many scientists does it take to have knowledge?". In McCain, Kevin; Kampourakis, Kostas (eds.). What is Scientific Knowledge? An Introduction to Contemporary Epistemology of Science. New York: Routledge. pp. 3–17. ISBN 978-1-138-57016-0. Retrieved 5 May 2021.
- Lindberg, David C. (2007). "Islamic science". The beginnings of Western science: the European Scientific tradition in philosophical, religious, and institutional context (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press. pp. 163–192. ISBN 978-0-226-48205-7.
- Szycher, Michael (2016). "Establishing your dream team". Commercialization Secrets for Scientists and Engineers. New York: Routledge. pp. 159–176. ISBN 978-1-138-40741-1. Retrieved 5 May 2021.
- "Science". Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. Archived from the original on 1 September 2019. Retrieved 16 October 2011.
- Vaan, Michiel de (2008). "sciō". Etymological Dictionary of Latin and the other Italic Languages. Indo-European Etymological Dictionary. p. 545. ISBN 978-90-04-16797-1.
- Cahan, David (2003). From natural philosophy to the sciences: writing the history of nineteenth-century science. University of Chicago Press. pp. 3–15. ISBN 0-226-08927-4.
- Ross, Sydney (1962). "Scientist: The story of a word". Annals of Science. 18 (2): 65–85. doi:10.1080/00033796200202722.
- "scientist". Oxford English Dictionary (Online ed.). Oxford University Press. (Subscription or participating institution membership required.)
- Carruthers, Peter (2 May 2002). Carruthers, Peter; Stich, Stephen; Siegal, Michael (eds.). "The roots of scientific reasoning: infancy, modularity and the art of tracking". The Cognitive Basis of Science. Cambridge University Press. pp. 73–96. doi:10.1017/cbo9780511613517.005. ISBN 978-0-521-81229-0.
- Lombard, Marlize; Gärdenfors, Peter (2017). "Tracking the Evolution of Causal Cognition in Humans". Journal of Anthropological Sciences. 95 (95): 219–234. doi:10.4436/JASS.95006. ISSN 1827-4765. PMID 28489015.
- Graeber, David; Wengrow, David (2021). The Dawn of Everything. p. 248.
- Budd, Paul; Taylor, Timothy (1995). "The Faerie Smith Meets the Bronze Industry: Magic Versus Science in the Interpretation of Prehistoric Metal-Making". World Archaeology. 27 (1): 133–143. doi:10.1080/00438243.1995.9980297. JSTOR 124782.
- Tuomela, Raimo (1987). "Science, Protoscience, and Pseudoscience". In Pitt, J. C.; Pera, M. (eds.). Rational Changes in Science. Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science. Vol. 98. Dordrecht: Springer. pp. 83–101. doi:10.1007/978-94-009-3779-6_4. ISBN 978-94-010-8181-8.
- Smith, Pamela H. (2009). "Science on the Move: Recent Trends in the History of Early Modern Science". Renaissance Quarterly. 62 (2): 345–375. doi:10.1086/599864. PMID 19750597. S2CID 43643053.
- Fleck, Robert (March 2021). "Fundamental Themes in Physics from the History of Art". Physics in Perspective. 23 (1): 25–48. Bibcode:2021PhP....23...25F. doi:10.1007/s00016-020-00269-7. ISSN 1422-6944. S2CID 253597172.
- Scott, Colin (2011). "Science for the West, Myth for the Rest?". In Harding, Sandra (ed.). The Postcolonial Science and Technology Studies Reader. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. p. 175. ISBN 978-0-8223-4936-5. JSTOR j.ctv11g96cc.16.
- Dear, Peter (2012). "Historiography of Not-So-Recent Science". History of Science. 50 (2): 197–211. doi:10.1177/007327531205000203. S2CID 141599452.
- Rochberg, Francesca (2011). "Ch.1 Natural Knowledge in Ancient Mesopotamia". In Shank, Michael; Numbers, Ronald; Harrison, Peter (eds.). Wrestling with Nature: From Omens to Science. University of Chicago Press. p. 9. ISBN 978-0-226-31783-0.
- Krebs, Robert E. (2004). Groundbreaking Scientific Experiments, Inventions, and Discoveries of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. Greenwood Publishing Group. p. 127. ISBN 978-0313324338.
- Erlich, Ḥaggai; Gershoni, Israel (2000). The Nile: Histories, Cultures, Myths. Lynne Rienner. pp. 80–81. ISBN 978-1-55587-672-2. Retrieved 9 January 2020.
The Nile occupied an important position in Egyptian culture; it influenced the development of mathematics, geography, and the calendar; Egyptian geometry advanced due to the practice of land measurement "because the overflow of the Nile caused the boundary of each person's land to disappear."
- "Telling Time in Ancient Egypt". The Met's Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History. Archived from the original on 3 March 2022. Retrieved 27 May 2022.
- ^ McIntosh, Jane R. (2005). Ancient Mesopotamia: New Perspectives. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO. pp. 273–276. ISBN 978-1-57607-966-9. Retrieved 20 October 2020.
- Aaboe, Asger (2 May 1974). "Scientific Astronomy in Antiquity". Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society. 276 (1257): 21–42. Bibcode:1974RSPTA.276...21A. doi:10.1098/rsta.1974.0007. JSTOR 74272. S2CID 122508567.
- Biggs, R. D. (2005). "Medicine, Surgery, and Public Health in Ancient Mesopotamia". Journal of Assyrian Academic Studies. 19 (1): 7–18.
- Lehoux, Daryn (2011). "2. Natural Knowledge in the Classical World". In Shank, Michael; Numbers, Ronald; Harrison, Peter (eds.). Wrestling with Nature: From Omens to Science. University of Chicago Press. p. 39. ISBN 978-0-226-31783-0.
- An account of the pre-Socratic use of the concept of φύσις may be found in Naddaf, Gerard (2006). The Greek Concept of Nature. SUNY Press, and in Ducarme, Frédéric; Couvet, Denis (2020). "What does 'nature' mean?" (PDF). Palgrave Communications. 6 (14). Springer Nature. doi:10.1057/s41599-020-0390-y. Archived (PDF) from the original on 16 August 2023. Retrieved 16 August 2023. The word φύσις, while first used in connection with a plant in Homer, occurs early in Greek philosophy, and in several senses. Generally, these senses match rather well the current senses in which the English word nature is used, as confirmed by Guthrie, W. K. C. Presocratic Tradition from Parmenides to Democritus (volume 2 of his History of Greek Philosophy), Cambridge University Press, 1965.
- Strauss, Leo; Gildin, Hilail (1989). "Progress or Return? The Contemporary Crisis in Western Education". An Introduction to Political Philosophy: Ten Essays by Leo Strauss. Wayne State University Press. p. 209. ISBN 978-0814319024. Retrieved 30 May 2022.
- O'Grady, Patricia F. (2016). Thales of Miletus: The Beginnings of Western Science and Philosophy. New York: Routledge. p. 245. ISBN 978-0-7546-0533-1. Retrieved 20 October 2020.
- ^ Burkert, Walter (1 June 1972). Lore and Science in Ancient Pythagoreanism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. ISBN 978-0-674-53918-1.
- Pullman, Bernard (1998). The Atom in the History of Human Thought. Oxford University Press. pp. 31–33. Bibcode:1998ahht.book.....P. ISBN 978-0-19-515040-7. Retrieved 20 October 2020.
- Cohen, Henri; Lefebvre, Claire, eds. (2017). Handbook of Categorization in Cognitive Science (2nd ed.). Amsterdam: Elsevier. p. 427. ISBN 978-0-08-101107-2. Retrieved 20 October 2020.
- Lucretius (fl.1st cenruty BCE) De rerum natura
- Margotta, Roberto (1968). The Story of Medicine. New York: Golden Press. Retrieved 18 November 2020.
- Touwaide, Alain (2005). Glick, Thomas F.; Livesey, Steven; Wallis, Faith (eds.). Medieval Science, Technology, and Medicine: An Encyclopedia. New York: Routledge. p. 224. ISBN 978-0-415-96930-7. Retrieved 20 October 2020.
- Leff, Samuel; Leff, Vera (1956). From Witchcraft to World Health. London: Macmillan. Retrieved 23 August 2020.
- "Plato, Apology". p. 17. Archived from the original on 29 January 2018. Retrieved 1 November 2017.
- "Plato, Apology". p. 27. Archived from the original on 29 January 2018. Retrieved 1 November 2017.
- Aristotle. Nicomachean Ethics (H. Rackham ed.). 1139b. Archived from the original on 17 March 2012. Retrieved 22 September 2010.
- ^ McClellan, James E. III; Dorn, Harold (2015). Science and Technology in World History: An Introduction. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. pp. 99–100. ISBN 978-1-4214-1776-9. Retrieved 20 October 2020.
- Graßhoff, Gerd (1990). The History of Ptolemy's Star Catalogue. Studies in the History of Mathematics and Physical Sciences. Vol. 14. New York: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-4468-4. ISBN 978-1-4612-8788-9.
- Hoffmann, Susanne M. (2017). Hipparchs Himmelsglobus (in German). Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Bibcode:2017hihi.book.....H. doi:10.1007/978-3-658-18683-8. ISBN 978-3-658-18682-1.
- Edwards, C. H. Jr. (1979). The Historical Development of the Calculus. New York: Springer. p. 75. ISBN 978-0-387-94313-8. Retrieved 20 October 2020.
- Lawson, Russell M. (2004). Science in the Ancient World: An Encyclopedia. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO. pp. 190–191. ISBN 978-1-85109-539-1. Retrieved 20 October 2020.
- Murphy, Trevor Morgan (2004). Pliny the Elder's Natural History: The Empire in the Encyclopedia. Oxford University Press. p. 1. ISBN 978-0-19-926288-5. Retrieved 20 October 2020.
- Doody, Aude (2010). Pliny's Encyclopedia: The Reception of the Natural History. Cambridge University Press. p. 1. ISBN 978-1-139-48453-4. Retrieved 20 October 2020.
- Conner, Clifford D. (2005). A People's History of Science: Miners, Midwives, and "Low Mechanicks". New York: Nation Books. pp. 72–74. ISBN 1-56025-748-2.
- Grant, Edward (1996). The Foundations of Modern Science in the Middle Ages: Their Religious, Institutional and Intellectual Contexts. Cambridge Studies in the History of Science. Cambridge University Press. pp. 7–17. ISBN 978-0-521-56762-6. Retrieved 9 November 2018.
- Wildberg, Christian (1 May 2018). "Philoponus". In Zalta, Edward N. (ed.). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Archived from the original on 22 August 2019. Retrieved 1 May 2018.
- Falcon, Andrea (2019). "Aristotle on Causality". In Zalta, Edward (ed.). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2019 ed.). Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Archived from the original on 9 October 2020. Retrieved 3 October 2020.
- Grant, Edward (2007). "Islam and the eastward shift of Aristotelian natural philosophy". A History of Natural Philosophy: From the Ancient World to the Nineteenth Century. Cambridge University Press. pp. 62–67. ISBN 978-0-521-68957-1.
- Fisher, W. B. (1968–1991). The Cambridge history of Iran. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-20093-6.
- "Bayt al-Hikmah". Encyclopædia Britannica. Archived from the original on 4 November 2016. Retrieved 3 November 2016.
- Hossein Nasr, Seyyed; Leaman, Oliver, eds. (2001). History of Islamic Philosophy. Routledge. pp. 165–167. ISBN 978-0415259347.
- ^ Smith, A. Mark (2001). Alhacen's Theory of Visual Perception: A Critical Edition, with English Translation and Commentary, of the First Three Books of Alhacen's De Aspectibus, the Medieval Latin Version of Ibn al-Haytham's Kitāb al-Manāẓir, 2 vols. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society. Vol. 91. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society. ISBN 978-0-87169-914-5.
- Toomer, G. J. (1964). "Reviewed work: Ibn al-Haythams Weg zur Physik, Matthias Schramm". Isis. 55 (4): 463–465. doi:10.1086/349914. JSTOR 228328. See p. 464: "Schramm sums up achievement in the development of scientific method.", p. 465: "Schramm has demonstrated .. beyond any dispute that Ibn al-Haytham is a major figure in the Islamic scientific tradition, particularly in the creation of experimental techniques." p. 465: "only when the influence of Ibn al-Haytham and others on the mainstream of later medieval physical writings has been seriously investigated can Schramm's claim that Ibn al-Haytham was the true founder of modern physics be evaluated."
- Cohen, H. Floris (2010). "Greek nature knowledge transplanted: The Islamic world". How modern science came into the world. Four civilizations, one 17th-century breakthrough (2nd ed.). Amsterdam University Press. pp. 99–156. ISBN 978-90-8964-239-4.
- Selin, Helaine, ed. (2006). Encyclopaedia of the History of Science, Technology, and Medicine in Non-Western Cultures. Springer. pp. 155–156. Bibcode:2008ehst.book.....S. ISBN 978-1-4020-4559-2.
- Russell, Josiah C. (1959). "Gratian, Irnerius, and the Early Schools of Bologna". The Mississippi Quarterly. 12 (4): 168–188. JSTOR 26473232.
Perhaps even as early as 1088 (the date officially set for the founding of the University)
- "St. Albertus Magnus". Encyclopædia Britannica. Archived from the original on 28 October 2017. Retrieved 27 October 2017.
- Numbers, Ronald (2009). Galileo Goes to Jail and Other Myths about Science and Religion. Harvard University Press. p. 45. ISBN 978-0-674-03327-6. Retrieved 27 March 2018.
- ^ Smith, A. Mark (1981). "Getting the Big Picture in Perspectivist Optics". Isis. 72 (4): 568–589. doi:10.1086/352843. JSTOR 231249. PMID 7040292. S2CID 27806323.
- Goldstein, Bernard R. (2016). "Copernicus and the Origin of his Heliocentric System" (PDF). Journal for the History of Astronomy. 33 (3): 219–235. doi:10.1177/002182860203300301. S2CID 118351058. Archived from the original (PDF) on 12 April 2020. Retrieved 12 April 2020.
- Cohen, H. Floris (2010). "Greek nature knowledge transplanted and more: Renaissance Europe". How modern science came into the world. Four civilizations, one 17th-century breakthrough (2nd ed.). Amsterdam University Press. pp. 99–156. ISBN 978-90-8964-239-4.
- Koestler, Arthur (1990) . The Sleepwalkers: A History of Man's Changing Vision of the Universe. London: Penguin. p. 1. ISBN 0-14-019246-8.
- van Helden, Al (1995). "Pope Urban VIII". The Galileo Project. Archived from the original on 11 November 2016. Retrieved 3 November 2016.
- Gingerich, Owen (1975). "Copernicus and the Impact of Printing". Vistas in Astronomy. 17 (1): 201–218. Bibcode:1975VA.....17..201G. doi:10.1016/0083-6656(75)90061-6.
- Zagorin, Perez (1998). Francis Bacon. Princeton University Press. p. 84. ISBN 978-0-691-00966-7.
- Davis, Philip J.; Hersh, Reuben (1986). Descartes' Dream: The World According to Mathematics. Cambridge, MA: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
- Gribbin, John (2002). Science: A History 1543–2001. Allen Lane. p. 241. ISBN 978-0-7139-9503-9.
Although it was just one of the many factors in the Enlightenment, the success of Newtonian physics in providing a mathematical description of an ordered world clearly played a big part in the flowering of this movement in the eighteenth century
- "Gottfried Leibniz – Biography". Maths History. Archived from the original on 11 July 2017. Retrieved 2 March 2021.
- Freudenthal, Gideon; McLaughlin, Peter (20 May 2009). The Social and Economic Roots of the Scientific Revolution: Texts by Boris Hessen and Henryk Grossmann. Springer. ISBN 978-1-4020-9604-4. Retrieved 25 July 2018.
- Goddard Bergin, Thomas; Speake, Jennifer, eds. (1987). Encyclopedia of the Renaissance. Facts on File. ISBN 978-0816013159.
- van Horn Melton, James (2001). The Rise of the Public in Enlightenment Europe. Cambridge University Press. pp. 82–83. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511819421. ISBN 978-0511819421. Retrieved 27 May 2022.
- "The Scientific Revolution and the Enlightenment (1500–1780)" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 14 January 2024. Retrieved 29 January 2024.
- "Scientific Revolution". Encyclopædia Britannica. Archived from the original on 18 May 2019. Retrieved 29 January 2024.
- Madigan, M.; Martinko, J., eds. (2006). Brock Biology of Microorganisms (11th ed.). Prentice Hall. ISBN 978-0131443297.
- Guicciardini, N. (1999). Reading the Principia: The Debate on Newton's Methods for Natural Philosophy from 1687 to 1736. New York: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0521640664.
- Calisher, CH (2007). "Taxonomy: what's in a name? Doesn't a rose by any other name smell as sweet?". Croatian Medical Journal. 48 (2): 268–270. PMC 2080517. PMID 17436393.
- Darrigol, Olivier (2000). Electrodynamics from Ampère to Einstein. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0198505949.
- Olby, R. C.; Cantor, G. N.; Christie, J. R. R.; Hodge, M. J. S. (1990). Companion to the History of Modern Science. London: Routledge. p. 265.
- Magnusson, Magnus (10 November 2003). "Review of James Buchan, Capital of the Mind: how Edinburgh Changed the World". New Statesman. Archived from the original on 6 June 2011. Retrieved 27 April 2014.
- Swingewood, Alan (1970). "Origins of Sociology: The Case of the Scottish Enlightenment". The British Journal of Sociology. 21 (2): 164–180. JSTOR 588406.
- Fry, Michael (1992). Adam Smith's Legacy: His Place in the Development of Modern Economics. Paul Samuelson, Lawrence Klein, Franco Modigliani, James M. Buchanan, Maurice Allais, Theodore Schultz, Richard Stone, James Tobin, Wassily Leontief, Jan Tinbergen. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-06164-3.
- Lightman, Bernard (2011). "13. Science and the Public". In Shank, Michael; Numbers, Ronald; Harrison, Peter (eds.). Wrestling with Nature: From Omens to Science. University of Chicago Press. p. 367. ISBN 978-0-226-31783-0.
- Leahey, Thomas Hardy (2018). "The psychology of consciousness". A History of Psychology: From Antiquity to Modernity (8th ed.). New York: Routledge. pp. 219–253. ISBN 978-1-138-65242-2.
- Padian, Kevin (2008). "Darwin's enduring legacy". Nature. 451 (7179): 632–634. Bibcode:2008Natur.451..632P. doi:10.1038/451632a. PMID 18256649.
- Henig, Robin Marantz (2000). The monk in the garden: the lost and found genius of Gregor Mendel, the father of genetics. pp. 134–138.
- Miko, Ilona (2008). "Gregor Mendel's principles of inheritance form the cornerstone of modern genetics. So just what are they?". Nature Education. 1 (1): 134. Archived from the original on 19 July 2019. Retrieved 9 May 2021.
- Rocke, Alan J. (2005). "In Search of El Dorado: John Dalton and the Origins of the Atomic Theory". Social Research. 72 (1): 125–158. doi:10.1353/sor.2005.0003. JSTOR 40972005. S2CID 141350239.
- ^ Reichl, Linda (1980). A Modern Course in Statistical Physics. Edward Arnold. ISBN 0-7131-2789-9.
- Rao, Y. V. C. (1997). Chemical Engineering Thermodynamics. Universities Press. p. 158. ISBN 978-81-7371-048-3.
- Heidrich, M. (2016). "Bounded energy exchange as an alternative to the third law of thermodynamics". Annals of Physics. 373: 665–681. Bibcode:2016AnPhy.373..665H. doi:10.1016/j.aop.2016.07.031.
- Mould, Richard F. (1995). A century of X-rays and radioactivity in medicine: with emphasis on photographic records of the early years (Reprint. with minor corr ed.). Bristol: Inst. of Physics Publ. p. 12. ISBN 978-0-7503-0224-1.
- ^ Estreicher, Tadeusz (1938). "Curie, Maria ze Skłodowskich". Polski słownik biograficzny, vol. 4 (in Polish). p. 113.
- Thomson, J. J. (1897). "Cathode Rays". Philosophical Magazine. 44 (269): 293–316. doi:10.1080/14786449708621070.
- Goyotte, Dolores (2017). "The Surgical Legacy of World War II. Part II: The age of antibiotics" (PDF). The Surgical Technologist. 109: 257–264. Archived (PDF) from the original on 5 May 2021. Retrieved 8 January 2021.
- Erisman, Jan Willem; Sutton, M. A.; Galloway, J.; Klimont, Z.; Winiwarter, W. (October 2008). "How a century of ammonia synthesis changed the world". Nature Geoscience. 1 (10): 636–639. Bibcode:2008NatGe...1..636E. doi:10.1038/ngeo325. S2CID 94880859. Archived from the original on 23 July 2010. Retrieved 22 October 2010.
- Emmett, Robert; Zelko, Frank (2014). Emmett, Rob; Zelko, Frank (eds.). "Minding the Gap: Working Across Disciplines in Environmental Studies". Environment & Society Portal. RCC Perspectives no. 2. doi:10.5282/rcc/6313. Archived from the original on 21 January 2022.
- Furner, Jonathan (1 June 2003). "Little Book, Big Book: Before and After Little Science, Big Science: A Review Article, Part I". Journal of Librarianship and Information Science. 35 (2): 115–125. doi:10.1177/0961000603352006. S2CID 34844169.
- Kraft, Chris; Schefter, James (2001). Flight: My Life in Mission Control. New York: Dutton. pp. 3–5. ISBN 0-525-94571-7.
- Kahn, Herman (1962). Thinking about the Unthinkable. Horizon.
- Shrum, Wesley (2007). Structures of scientific collaboration. Joel Genuth, Ivan Chompalov. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. ISBN 978-0-262-28358-8.
- Rosser, Sue V. (12 March 2012). Breaking into the Lab: Engineering Progress for Women in Science. New York University Press. p. 7. ISBN 978-0-8147-7645-2.
- Penzias, A. A. (2006). "The origin of elements" (PDF). Science. 205 (4406). Nobel Foundation: 549–554. doi:10.1126/science.205.4406.549. PMID 17729659. Archived (PDF) from the original on 17 January 2011. Retrieved 4 October 2006.
- Weinberg, S. (1972). Gravitation and Cosmology. John Whitney & Sons. pp. 464–495. ISBN 978-0-471-92567-5.
- Futuyma, Douglas J.; Kirkpatrick, Mark (2017). "Chapter 1: Evolutionary Biology". Evolution (4th ed.). Sinauer. pp. 3–26. ISBN 978-1605356051.
- Miller, Arthur I. (1981). Albert Einstein's special theory of relativity. Emergence (1905) and early interpretation (1905–1911). Reading: Addison–Wesley. ISBN 978-0-201-04679-3.
- ter Haar, D. (1967). The Old Quantum Theory. Pergamon. pp. 206. ISBN 978-0-08-012101-7.
- von Bertalanffy, Ludwig (1972). "The History and Status of General Systems Theory". The Academy of Management Journal. 15 (4): 407–426. JSTOR 255139.
- Naidoo, Nasheen; Pawitan, Yudi; Soong, Richie; Cooper, David N.; Ku, Chee-Seng (October 2011). "Human genetics and genomics a decade after the release of the draft sequence of the human genome". Human Genomics. 5 (6): 577–622. doi:10.1186/1479-7364-5-6-577. PMC 3525251. PMID 22155605.
- Rashid, S. Tamir; Alexander, Graeme J. M. (March 2013). "Induced pluripotent stem cells: from Nobel Prizes to clinical applications". Journal of Hepatology. 58 (3): 625–629. doi:10.1016/j.jhep.2012.10.026. ISSN 1600-0641. PMID 23131523.
- O'Luanaigh, C. (14 March 2013). "New results indicate that new particle is a Higgs boson" (Press release). CERN. Archived from the original on 20 October 2015. Retrieved 9 October 2013.
- Abbott, B. P.; Abbott, R.; Abbott, T. D.; Acernese, F.; Ackley, K.; Adams, C.; Adams, T.; Addesso, P.; Adhikari, R. X.; Adya, V. B.; Affeldt, C.; Afrough, M.; Agarwal, B.; Agathos, M.; Agatsuma, K.; Aggarwal, N.; Aguiar, O. D.; Aiello, L.; Ain, A.; Ajith, P.; Allen, B.; Allen, G.; Allocca, A.; Altin, P. A.; Amato, A.; Ananyeva, A.; Anderson, S. B.; Anderson, W. G.; Angelova, S. V.; et al. (2017). "Multi-messenger Observations of a Binary Neutron Star Merger". The Astrophysical Journal. 848 (2): L12. arXiv:1710.05833. Bibcode:2017ApJ...848L..12A. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa91c9. S2CID 217162243.
- Cho, Adrian (2017). "Merging neutron stars generate gravitational waves and a celestial light show". Science. doi:10.1126/science.aar2149.
- "Media Advisory: First Results from the Event Horizon Telescope to be Presented on April 10th". Event Horizon Telescope. 20 April 2019. Archived from the original on 20 April 2019. Retrieved 21 September 2021.
- "Scientific Method: Relationships Among Scientific Paradigms". Seed Magazine. 7 March 2007. Archived from the original on 1 November 2016. Retrieved 4 November 2016.
- Bunge, Mario Augusto (1998). Philosophy of Science: From Problem to Theory. Transaction. p. 24. ISBN 978-0-7658-0413-6.
- ^ Popper, Karl R. (2002a) . "A survey of some fundamental problems". The Logic of Scientific Discovery. New York: Routledge. pp. 3–26. ISBN 978-0-415-27844-7.
- Gauch, Hugh G. Jr. (2003). "Science in perspective". Scientific Method in Practice. Cambridge University Press. pp. 21–73. ISBN 978-0-521-01708-4. Retrieved 3 September 2018.
- Oglivie, Brian W. (2008). "Introduction". The Science of Describing: Natural History in Renaissance Europe (Paperback ed.). University of Chicago Press. pp. 1–24. ISBN 978-0-226-62088-6.
- "Natural History". Princeton University WordNet. Archived from the original on 3 March 2012. Retrieved 21 October 2012.
- "Formal Sciences: Washington and Lee University". Washington and Lee University. Archived from the original on 14 May 2021. Retrieved 14 May 2021.
A "formal science" is an area of study that uses formal systems to generate knowledge such as in Mathematics and Computer Science. Formal sciences are important subjects because all of quantitative science depends on them.
- "Formal system". Encyclopædia Britannica. Archived from the original on 29 April 2008. Retrieved 30 May 2022.
- Tomalin, Marcus (2006). Linguistics and the Formal Sciences.
- Löwe, Benedikt (2002). "The Formal Sciences: Their Scope, Their Foundations, and Their Unity". Synthese. 133 (1/2): 5–11. doi:10.1023/a:1020887832028. S2CID 9272212.
- Bill, Thompson (2007). "2.4 Formal Science and Applied Mathematics". The Nature of Statistical Evidence. Lecture Notes in Statistics. Vol. 189. Springer. p. 15.
- Bishop, Alan (1991). "Environmental activities and mathematical culture". Mathematical Enculturation: A Cultural Perspective on Mathematics Education. Norwell, MA: Kluwer. pp. 20–59. ISBN 978-0-7923-1270-3. Retrieved 24 March 2018.
- Bunge, Mario (1998). "The Scientific Approach". Philosophy of Science: Volume 1, From Problem to Theory. Vol. 1 (revised ed.). New York: Routledge. pp. 3–50. ISBN 978-0-7658-0413-6.
- Mujumdar, Anshu Gupta; Singh, Tejinder (2016). "Cognitive science and the connection between physics and mathematics". In Aguirre, Anthony; Foster, Brendan (eds.). Trick or Truth?: The Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics. The Frontiers Collection. Switzerland: Springer. pp. 201–218. ISBN 978-3-319-27494-2.
- "About the Journal". Journal of Mathematical Physics. Archived from the original on 3 October 2006. Retrieved 3 October 2006.
- Restrepo, G. (2016). "Mathematical chemistry, a new discipline". In Scerri, E.; Fisher, G. (eds.). Essays in the philosophy of chemistry. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 332–351. ISBN 978-0-19-049459-9.
- "What is mathematical biology". Centre for Mathematical Biology, University of Bath. Archived from the original on 23 September 2018. Retrieved 7 June 2018.
- Johnson, Tim (1 September 2009). "What is financial mathematics?". +Plus Magazine. Archived from the original on 8 April 2022. Retrieved 1 March 2021.
- Varian, Hal (1997). "What Use Is Economic Theory?". In D'Autume, A.; Cartelier, J. (eds.). Is Economics Becoming a Hard Science?. Edward Elgar. Pre-publication. Archived 25 June 2006 at the Wayback Machine. Retrieved 1 April 2008.
- Abraham, Reem Rachel (2004). "Clinically oriented physiology teaching: strategy for developing critical-thinking skills in undergraduate medical students". Advances in Physiology Education. 28 (3): 102–104. doi:10.1152/advan.00001.2004. PMID 15319191. S2CID 21610124.
- "Engineering". Cambridge Dictionary. Cambridge University Press. Archived from the original on 19 August 2019. Retrieved 25 March 2021.
- Brooks, Harvey (1 September 1994). "The relationship between science and technology" (PDF). Research Policy. Special Issue in Honor of Nathan Rosenberg. 23 (5): 477–486. doi:10.1016/0048-7333(94)01001-3. ISSN 0048-7333. Archived (PDF) from the original on 30 December 2022. Retrieved 14 October 2022.
- Firth, John (2020). "Science in medicine: when, how, and what". Oxford textbook of medicine. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-874669-0.
- Saunders, J. (June 2000). "The practice of clinical medicine as an art and as a science". Med Humanit. 26 (1): 18–22. doi:10.1136/mh.26.1.18. PMC 1071282. PMID 12484313. S2CID 73306806.
- Davis, Bernard D. (March 2000). "Limited scope of science". Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews. 64 (1): 1–12. doi:10.1128/MMBR.64.1.1-12.2000. PMC 98983. PMID 10704471 & "Technology" in Davis, Bernard (March 2000). "The scientist's world". Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews. 64 (1): 1–12. doi:10.1128/MMBR.64.1.1-12.2000. PMC 98983. PMID 10704471.
- McCormick, James (2001). "Scientific medicine—fact of fiction? The contribution of science to medicine". Occasional Paper (Royal College of General Practitioners) (80): 3–6. PMC 2560978. PMID 19790950.
- Breznau, Nate (2022). "Integrating Computer Prediction Methods in Social Science: A Comment on Hofman et al. (2021)". Social Science Computer Review. 40 (3): 844–853. doi:10.1177/08944393211049776. S2CID 248334446. Archived from the original on 29 April 2024. Retrieved 16 August 2023.
- Hofman, Jake M.; Watts, Duncan J.; Athey, Susan; Garip, Filiz; Griffiths, Thomas L.; Kleinberg, Jon; Margetts, Helen; Mullainathan, Sendhil; Salganik, Matthew J.; Vazire, Simine; Vespignani, Alessandro (July 2021). "Integrating explanation and prediction in computational social science". Nature. 595 (7866): 181–188. Bibcode:2021Natur.595..181H. doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03659-0. ISSN 1476-4687. PMID 34194044. S2CID 235697917. Archived from the original on 25 September 2021. Retrieved 25 September 2021.
- Nissani, M. (1995). "Fruits, Salads, and Smoothies: A Working definition of Interdisciplinarity". The Journal of Educational Thought. 29 (2): 121–128. JSTOR 23767672.
- Moody, G. (2004). Digital Code of Life: How Bioinformatics is Revolutionizing Science, Medicine, and Business. John Wiley & Sons. p. vii. ISBN 978-0-471-32788-2.
- Ausburg, Tanya (2006). Becoming Interdisciplinary: An Introduction to Interdisciplinary Studies (2nd ed.). New York: Kendall/Hunt Publishing.
- Dawkins, Richard (10 May 2006). "To Live at All Is Miracle Enough". RichardDawkins.net. Archived from the original on 19 January 2012. Retrieved 5 February 2012.
- ^ di Francia, Giuliano Toraldo (1976). "The method of physics". The Investigation of the Physical World. Cambridge University Press. pp. 1–52. ISBN 978-0-521-29925-1.
The amazing point is that for the first time since the discovery of mathematics, a method has been introduced, the results of which have an intersubjective value!
- Popper, Karl R. (2002e) . "The problem of the empirical basis". The Logic of Scientific Discovery. New York: Routledge. pp. 3–26. ISBN 978-0-415-27844-7.
- Diggle, Peter J.; Chetwynd, Amanda G. (2011). Statistics and Scientific Method: An Introduction for Students and Researchers. Oxford University Press. pp. 1–2. ISBN 978-0199543182.
- Wilson, Edward (1999). Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge. New York: Vintage. ISBN 978-0-679-76867-8.
- Fara, Patricia (2009). "Decisions". Science: A Four Thousand Year History. Oxford University Press. p. 408. ISBN 978-0-19-922689-4.
- Aldrich, John (1995). "Correlations Genuine and Spurious in Pearson and Yule". Statistical Science. 10 (4): 364–376. doi:10.1214/ss/1177009870. JSTOR 2246135.
- Nola, Robert; Irzik, Gürol (2005). Philosophy, science, education and culture. Science & technology education library. Vol. 28. Springer. pp. 207–230. ISBN 978-1-4020-3769-6.
- van Gelder, Tim (1999). ""Heads I win, tails you lose": A Foray Into the Psychology of Philosophy" (PDF). University of Melbourne. Archived from the original (PDF) on 9 April 2008. Retrieved 28 March 2008.
- Pease, Craig (6 September 2006). "Chapter 23. Deliberate bias: Conflict creates bad science". Science for Business, Law and Journalism. Vermont Law School. Archived from the original on 19 June 2010.
- Shatz, David (2004). Peer Review: A Critical Inquiry. Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN 978-0-7425-1434-8.
- Krimsky, Sheldon (2003). Science in the Private Interest: Has the Lure of Profits Corrupted the Virtue of Biomedical Research. Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN 978-0-7425-1479-9.
- Bulger, Ruth Ellen; Heitman, Elizabeth; Reiser, Stanley Joel (2002). The Ethical Dimensions of the Biological and Health Sciences (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-00886-0.
- Backer, Patricia Ryaby (29 October 2004). "What is the scientific method?". San Jose State University. Archived from the original on 8 April 2008. Retrieved 28 March 2008.
- Ziman, John (1978c). "Common observation". Reliable knowledge: An exploration of the grounds for belief in science. Cambridge University Press. pp. 42–76. ISBN 978-0-521-22087-3.
- Ziman, J. M. (1980). "The proliferation of scientific literature: a natural process". Science. 208 (4442): 369–371. Bibcode:1980Sci...208..369Z. doi:10.1126/science.7367863. PMID 7367863.
- Subramanyam, Krishna; Subramanyam, Bhadriraju (1981). Scientific and Technical Information Resources. CRC Press. ISBN 978-0-8247-8297-9.
- ^ Bush, Vannevar (July 1945). "Science the Endless Frontier". National Science Foundation. Archived from the original on 7 November 2016. Retrieved 4 November 2016.
- Schooler, J. W. (2014). "Metascience could rescue the 'replication crisis'". Nature. 515 (7525): 9. Bibcode:2014Natur.515....9S. doi:10.1038/515009a. PMID 25373639.
- Pashler, Harold; Wagenmakers, Eric Jan (2012). "Editors' Introduction to the Special Section on Replicability in Psychological Science: A Crisis of Confidence?". Perspectives on Psychological Science. 7 (6): 528–530. doi:10.1177/1745691612465253. PMID 26168108. S2CID 26361121.
- Ioannidis, John P. A.; Fanelli, Daniele; Dunne, Debbie Drake; Goodman, Steven N. (2 October 2015). "Meta-research: Evaluation and Improvement of Research Methods and Practices". PLOS Biology. 13 (10): –1002264. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1002264. ISSN 1545-7885. PMC 4592065. PMID 26431313.
- Hansson, Sven Ove (3 September 2008). "Science and Pseudoscience". In Zalta, Edward N. (ed.). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Section 2: The "science" of pseudoscience. Archived from the original on 29 October 2021. Retrieved 28 May 2022.
- Shermer, Michael (1997). Why people believe weird things: pseudoscience, superstition, and other confusions of our time. New York: W. H. Freeman & Co. p. 17. ISBN 978-0-7167-3090-3.
- Feynman, Richard (1974). "Cargo Cult Science". Center for Theoretical Neuroscience. Columbia University. Archived from the original on 4 March 2005. Retrieved 4 November 2016.
- Novella, Steven (2018). The Skeptics' Guide to the Universe: How to Know What's Really Real in a World Increasingly Full of Fake. Hodder & Stoughton. p. 162. ISBN 978-1473696419.
- "Coping with fraud" (PDF). The COPE Report 1999: 11–18. Archived from the original (PDF) on 28 September 2007. Retrieved 21 July 2011.
It is 10 years, to the month, since Stephen Lock ... Reproduced with kind permission of the Editor, The Lancet.
- ^ Godfrey-Smith, Peter (2003c). "Induction and confirmation". Theory and Reality: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science. University of Chicago. pp. 39–56. ISBN 978-0-226-30062-7.
- Godfrey-Smith, Peter (2003o). "Empiricism, naturalism, and scientific realism?". Theory and Reality: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science. University of Chicago. pp. 219–232. ISBN 978-0-226-30062-7.
- Godfrey-Smith, Peter (2003b). "Logic plus empiricism". Theory and Reality: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science. University of Chicago. pp. 19–38. ISBN 978-0-226-30062-7.
- ^ Godfrey-Smith, Peter (2003d). "Popper: Conjecture and refutation". Theory and Reality: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science. University of Chicago. pp. 57–74. ISBN 978-0-226-30062-7.
- Godfrey-Smith, Peter (2003g). "Lakatos, Laudan, Feyerabend, and frameworks". Theory and Reality: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science. University of Chicago. pp. 102–121. ISBN 978-0-226-30062-7.
- Popper, Karl (1972). Objective Knowledge.
- Newton-Smith, W. H. (1994). The Rationality of Science. London: Routledge. p. 30. ISBN 978-0-7100-0913-5.
- Votsis, I. (2004). The Epistemological Status of Scientific Theories: An Investigation of the Structural Realist Account (PhD thesis). University of London, London School of Economics. p. 39.
- Bird, Alexander (2013). "Thomas Kuhn". In Zalta, Edward N. (ed.). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Archived from the original on 15 July 2020. Retrieved 26 October 2015.
- Kuhn, Thomas S. (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press. p. 206. ISBN 978-0-226-45804-5. Archived from the original on 19 October 2021. Retrieved 30 May 2022.
- Godfrey-Smith, Peter (2003). "Naturalistic philosophy in theory and practice". Theory and Reality: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science. University of Chicago. pp. 149–162. ISBN 978-0-226-30062-7.
- Brugger, E. Christian (2004). "Casebeer, William D. Natural Ethical Facts: Evolution, Connectionism, and Moral Cognition". The Review of Metaphysics. 58 (2).
- Kornfeld, W.; Hewitt, C. E. (1981). "The Scientific Community Metaphor" (PDF). IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics. 11 (1): 24–33. doi:10.1109/TSMC.1981.4308575. hdl:1721.1/5693. S2CID 1322857. Archived (PDF) from the original on 8 April 2016. Retrieved 26 May 2022.
- "Eusocial climbers" (PDF). E. O. Wilson Foundation. Archived (PDF) from the original on 27 April 2019. Retrieved 3 September 2018.
But he's not a scientist, he's never done scientific research. My definition of a scientist is that you can complete the following sentence: 'he or she has shown that...'," Wilson says.
- "Our definition of a scientist". Science Council. Archived from the original on 23 August 2019. Retrieved 7 September 2018.
A scientist is someone who systematically gathers and uses research and evidence, making a hypothesis and testing it, to gain and share understanding and knowledge.
- Cyranoski, David; Gilbert, Natasha; Ledford, Heidi; Nayar, Anjali; Yahia, Mohammed (2011). "Education: The PhD factory". Nature. 472 (7343): 276–279. Bibcode:2011Natur.472..276C. doi:10.1038/472276a. PMID 21512548.
- Kwok, Roberta (2017). "Flexible working: Science in the gig economy". Nature. 550 (7677): 419–421. doi:10.1038/nj7677-549a.
- Woolston, Chris (2007). "Many junior scientists need to take a hard look at their job prospects". Nature. 550 (7677): 549–552. doi:10.1038/nj7677-549a.
- Lee, Adrian; Dennis, Carina; Campbell, Phillip (2007). "Graduate survey: A love–hurt relationship". Nature. 550 (7677): 549–552. doi:10.1038/nj7677-549a.
- Cyranoski, David; Gilbert, Natasha; Ledford, Heidi; Nayar, Anjali; Yahia, Mohammed (2011). "Education: The PhD factory". Nature. 472 (7343): 276–279. Bibcode:2011Natur.472..276C. doi:10.1038/472276a. PMID 21512548.
- Kwok, Roberta (2017). "Flexible working: Science in the gig economy". Nature. 550 (7677): 419–421. doi:10.1038/nj7677-549a.
- Lee, Adrian; Dennis, Carina; Campbell, Phillip (2007). "Graduate survey: A love–hurt relationship". Nature. 550 (7677): 549–552. doi:10.1038/nj7677-549a.
- Whaley, Leigh Ann (2003). Women's History as Scientists. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.
- Spanier, Bonnie (1995). "From Molecules to Brains, Normal Science Supports Sexist Beliefs about Difference". Im/partial Science: Gender Identity in Molecular Biology. Indiana University Press. ISBN 978-0-253-20968-9.
- Parrott, Jim (9 August 2007). "Chronicle for Societies Founded from 1323 to 1599". Scholarly Societies Project. Archived from the original on 6 January 2014. Retrieved 11 September 2007.
- "The Environmental Studies Association of Canada – What is a Learned Society?". Archived from the original on 29 May 2013. Retrieved 10 May 2013.
- "Learned societies & academies". Archived from the original on 3 June 2014. Retrieved 10 May 2013.
- "Learned Societies, the key to realising an open access future?". Impact of Social Sciences. London School of Economics. 24 June 2019. Archived from the original on 5 February 2023. Retrieved 22 January 2023.
- "Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei" (in Italian). 2006. Archived from the original on 28 February 2010. Retrieved 11 September 2007.
- "Prince of Wales opens Royal Society's refurbished building". The Royal Society. 7 July 2004. Archived from the original on 9 April 2015. Retrieved 7 December 2009.
- Meynell, G. G. "The French Academy of Sciences, 1666–91: A reassessment of the French Académie royale des sciences under Colbert (1666–83) and Louvois (1683–91)". Archived from the original on 18 January 2012. Retrieved 13 October 2011.
- "Founding of the National Academy of Sciences". .nationalacademies.org. Archived from the original on 3 February 2013. Retrieved 12 March 2012.
- "The founding of the Kaiser Wilhelm Society (1911)". Max-Planck-Gesellschaft. Archived from the original on 2 March 2022. Retrieved 30 May 2022.
- "Introduction". Chinese Academy of Sciences. Archived from the original on 31 March 2022. Retrieved 31 May 2022.
- "Two main Science Councils merge to address complex global challenges". UNESCO. 5 July 2018. Archived from the original on 12 July 2021. Retrieved 21 October 2018.
- Stockton, Nick (7 October 2014). "How did the Nobel Prize become the biggest award on Earth?". Wired. Archived from the original on 19 June 2019. Retrieved 3 September 2018.
- "Main Science and Technology Indicators – 2008-1" (PDF). OECD. Archived from the original (PDF) on 15 February 2010.
- OECD Science, Technology and Industry Scoreboard 2015: Innovation for growth and society. OECD. 2015. p. 156. doi:10.1787/sti_scoreboard-2015-en. ISBN 978-9264239784. Archived from the original on 25 May 2022. Retrieved 28 May 2022 – via oecd-ilibrary.org.
- Kevles, Daniel (1977). "The National Science Foundation and the Debate over Postwar Research Policy, 1942–1945". Isis. 68 (241): 4–26. doi:10.1086/351711. PMID 320157. S2CID 32956693.
- "Argentina, National Scientific and Technological Research Council (CONICET)". International Science Council. Archived from the original on 16 May 2022. Retrieved 31 May 2022.
- Innis, Michelle (17 May 2016). "Australia to Lay Off Leading Scientist on Sea Levels". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on 7 May 2021. Retrieved 31 May 2022.
- "Le CNRS recherche 10.000 passionnés du blob". Le Figaro (in French). 20 October 2021. Archived from the original on 27 April 2022. Retrieved 31 May 2022.
- Bredow, Rafaela von (18 December 2021). "How a Prestigious Scientific Organization Came Under Suspicion of Treating Women Unequally". Der Spiegel. ISSN 2195-1349. Archived from the original on 29 May 2022. Retrieved 31 May 2022.
- "En espera de una "revolucionaria" noticia sobre Sagitario A*, el agujero negro supermasivo en el corazón de nuestra galaxia". ELMUNDO (in Spanish). 12 May 2022. Archived from the original on 13 May 2022. Retrieved 31 May 2022.
- Fletcher, Anthony C.; Bourne, Philip E. (27 September 2012). "Ten Simple Rules To Commercialize Scientific Research". PLOS Computational Biology. 8 (9): e1002712. Bibcode:2012PLSCB...8E2712F. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002712. ISSN 1553-734X. PMC 3459878. PMID 23028299.
- Marburger, John Harmen III (10 February 2015). Science policy up close. Crease, Robert P. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. ISBN 978-0-674-41709-0.
- Gauch, Hugh G. (2012). Scientific Method in Brief. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 7–10. ISBN 9781107666726.
- Benneworth, Paul; Jongbloed, Ben W. (31 July 2009). "Who matters to universities? A stakeholder perspective on humanities, arts and social sciences valorisation" (PDF). Higher Education. 59 (5): 567–588. doi:10.1007/s10734-009-9265-2. ISSN 0018-1560. Archived (PDF) from the original on 24 October 2023. Retrieved 16 August 2023.
- Dickson, David (11 October 2004). "Science journalism must keep a critical edge". Science and Development Network. Archived from the original on 21 June 2010.
- Mooney, Chris (November–December 2004). "Blinded By Science, How 'Balanced' Coverage Lets the Scientific Fringe Hijack Reality". Columbia Journalism Review. Vol. 43, no. 4. Archived from the original on 17 January 2010. Retrieved 20 February 2008.
- McIlwaine, S.; Nguyen, D. A. (2005). "Are Journalism Students Equipped to Write About Science?". Australian Studies in Journalism. 14: 41–60. Archived from the original on 1 August 2008. Retrieved 20 February 2008.
- Webb, Sarah (December 2013). "Popular science: Get the word out". Nature. 504 (7478): 177–179. doi:10.1038/nj7478-177a. PMID 24312943.
- Wilde, Fran (21 January 2016). "How Do You Like Your Science Fiction? Ten Authors Weigh In On 'Hard' vs. 'Soft' SF". Tor.com. Archived from the original on 4 April 2019. Retrieved 4 April 2019.
- Petrucci, Mario. "Creative Writing – Science". Archived from the original on 6 January 2009. Retrieved 27 April 2008.
- Tyson, Alec; Funk, Cary; Kennedy, Brian; Johnson, Courtney (15 September 2021). "Majority in U.S. Says Public Health Benefits of COVID-19 Restrictions Worth the Costs, Even as Large Shares Also See Downsides". Pew Research Center Science & Society. Archived from the original on 9 August 2022. Retrieved 4 August 2022.
- Kennedy, Brian (16 April 2020). "U.S. concern about climate change is rising, but mainly among Democrats". Pew Research Center. Archived from the original on 3 August 2022. Retrieved 4 August 2022.
- Philipp-Muller, Aviva; Lee, Spike W. S.; Petty, Richard E. (26 July 2022). "Why are people antiscience, and what can we do about it?". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 119 (30): e2120755119. Bibcode:2022PNAS..11920755P. doi:10.1073/pnas.2120755119. ISSN 0027-8424. PMC 9335320. PMID 35858405.
- Gauchat, Gordon William (2008). "A Test of Three Theories of Anti-Science Attitudes". Sociological Focus. 41 (4): 337–357. doi:10.1080/00380237.2008.10571338. S2CID 144645723.
- Poushter, Jacob; Fagan, Moira; Gubbala, Sneha (31 August 2022). "Climate Change Remains Top Global Threat Across 19-Country Survey". Pew Research Center's Global Attitudes Project. Archived from the original on 31 August 2022. Retrieved 5 September 2022.
- McRaney, David (2022). How Minds Change: The Surprising Science of Belief, Opinion, and Persuasion. New York: Portfolio/Penguin. ISBN 978-0-593-19029-6.
- McGreal, Chris (26 October 2021). "Revealed: 60% of Americans say oil firms are to blame for the climate crisis". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 26 October 2021.
Source: Guardian/Vice/CCN/YouGov poll. Note: ±4% margin of error.
- Goldberg, Jeanne (2017). "The Politicization of Scientific Issues: Looking through Galileo's Lens or through the Imaginary Looking Glass". Skeptical Inquirer. 41 (5): 34–39. Archived from the original on 16 August 2018. Retrieved 16 August 2018.
- Bolsen, Toby; Druckman, James N. (2015). "Counteracting the Politicization of Science". Journal of Communication (65): 746.
- ^ Freudenberg, William F.; Gramling, Robert; Davidson, Debra J. (2008). "Scientific Certainty Argumentation Methods (SCAMs): Science and the Politics of Doubt" (PDF). Sociological Inquiry. 78 (1): 2–38. doi:10.1111/j.1475-682X.2008.00219.x. Archived (PDF) from the original on 26 November 2020. Retrieved 12 April 2020.
- van der Linden, Sander; Leiserowitz, Anthony; Rosenthal, Seth; Maibach, Edward (2017). "Inoculating the Public against Misinformation about Climate Change" (PDF). Global Challenges. 1 (2): 1. Bibcode:2017GloCh...100008V. doi:10.1002/gch2.201600008. PMC 6607159. PMID 31565263. Archived (PDF) from the original on 4 April 2020. Retrieved 25 August 2019.
External links
Glossaries of science and engineering | |
---|---|
|
Science and technology studies | |
---|---|
Economics | |
History | |
Philosophy | |
Sociology | |
Science studies |
|
Technology studies |
|
Policy | |
- Media from Commons
- News from Wikinews
- Quotations from Wikiquote
- Textbooks from Wikibooks
- Resources from Wikiversity
- Travel guides from Wikivoyage