For other uses, see
Science (disambiguation).
The
Meissner effect causes a
magnet to levitate above a
high-temperature superconductor.
Science (from the
Latin scientia, meaning "
knowledge" or "to know") is the effort to
discover, and increase human understanding of how the
physical world works. Through controlled methods,
scientists use
observable physical evidence of
natural phenomena to collect data, and analyze this
information to explain what and how things work. Such methods include
experimentation that tries to
simulate natural phenomena under controlled conditions and thought experiments.
Knowledge in science is gained through
research.
Contents[
hide]
1 Etymology2 History of science3 History of usage of the word science3.1 Distinguished from technology4 Scientific method4.1 Mathematics5 Philosophy of science6 Critiques6.1 Science, pseudoscience and nonscience6.2 Philosophical focus6.3 The media and the scientific debate6.4 Epistemological inadequacies7 Scientific community7.1 Fields7.2 Institutions7.3 Literature8 See also9 Notes10 References11 Further reading12 External links//
Etymology
DNA determines the genetic structure of all life on earth
The word science is derived from the
Latin word scientia for
knowledge, the nominal form of the verb scire, "to know". The
Proto-Indo-European (PIE) root that yields scire is *skei-, meaning to "cut, separate, or discern". Other words from the same root include
Sanskrit chyati, "he cuts off",
Greek schizo, "I split" (hence English schism, schizophrenia), Latin scindo, "I split" (hence English rescind).
[1] From the
Middle Ages to the
Enlightenment, science or scientia meant any systematic recorded knowledge.
[2] Science therefore had the same sort of very broad meaning that
philosophy had at that time. In other languages, including French, Spanish, Portuguese, Italian, Polish and Russian, the word corresponding to science also carries this meaning.
History of science
Main article:
History of scienceHistory of usage of the word science
Well into the
eighteenth century, science and natural
philosophy were not quite synonymous, but only became so later with the direct use of what would become known formally as the
scientific method, which was earlier developed during the
Middle Ages and
early modern period in Europe and the
Middle East (see
History of scientific method). Prior to the 18th century, however, the preferred term for the study of nature was
natural philosophy, while English speakers most typically referred to the study of the human mind as
moral philosophy. By contrast, the word "science" in English was still used in the 17th century to refer to the
Aristotelian concept of knowledge which was secure enough to be used as a sure prescription for exactly how to do something. In this differing sense of the two words, the philosopher
John Locke in
An Essay Concerning Human Understanding wrote that "natural philosophy [the study of nature] is not capable of being made a science".
[3]By the early 1800s, 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 in the broad sense (see the introduction to this article) in modern terms such as
library science,
political science, and
computer science. In the more narrow sense of science, as natural philosophy became linked to an expanding set of well-defined laws (beginning with Galileo's laws, Kepler's laws, and Newton's laws for motion), it became more popular to refer to natural philosophy as natural science. Over the course of the nineteenth 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
social science) in a linguistic limbo by the end of the century and into the next.
[4]Through the 19th century, many English speakers were increasingly differentiating science (meaning a combination of what we now term natural and biological sciences) from all other forms of knowledge in a variety of ways. The now-familiar expression “
scientific method,” which refers to the prescriptive part of how to make discoveries in natural philosophy, was almost unused during the early part of the 19th century, but became widespread after the 1870s, though there was rarely totally agreement about just what it entailed.
[4] 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 William Whewell.
[5] Discussion of
scientists 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.
[4] 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.
By the twentieth century, the modern notion of science as a special brand of information 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.
[4] Over the 1900s, links between science and
technology also grew increasingly strong.
Distinguished from technology
By the end of the century, it is arguable that technology had even begun to eclipse science as a term of public attention and praise. Scholarly studies of science have begun to refer to "
technoscience" rather than science of technology separately. Meanwhile, such fields as
biotechnology and
nanotechnology are capturing the headlines. One author has suggested that, in the coming century, "science" may fall out of use, to be replaced by technoscience or even by some more exotic label such as "techknowledgy."
[4]Scientific method
Main article:
Scientific methodThe
Bohr model of the
atom, like many ideas in the
history of science, was at first prompted by and later partially disproved by experiment.
The
scientific method seeks to explain the events of
nature in a
reproducible way, and to use these reproductions to make useful
predictions. It is done through observation of natural phenomena, and/or through experimentation that tries to simulate natural events under controlled conditions. It provides an objective process to find solutions to problems in a number of scientific and technological fields.
[6]Based on observations of a phenomenon, a scientist may generate a
model. This is an attempt to describe or depict the phenomenon in terms of a logical physical or mathematical representation. As empirical evidence is gathered, a scientist can suggest a
hypothesis to explain the phenomenon. This description can be used to make predictions that are testable by experiment or observation using the scientific method. When a hypothesis proves unsatisfactory, it is either modified or discarded.
While performing experiments,
Scientists may have a preference for one outcome over another, and it is important that this tendency does not bias their interpretation.
[7][8] A strict following of the scientific method attempts to minimize the influence of a scientist's bias on the outcome of an experiment. This can be achieved by correct
experimental design, and a thorough
peer review of the experimental results as well as conclusions of a study.
[9][10] Once the experiment results are announced or published, an important cross-check can be the need to validate the results by an independent party.
[11]Once a hypothesis has survived testing, it may become adopted into the framework of a
scientific theory. 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. These broader theories may be formulated using principles such as
parsimony (e.g., "
Occam's Razor"). They are then repeatedly tested by analyzing how the collected evidence (
facts) compares to the theory. When a theory survives a sufficiently large number of empirical observations, it then becomes a scientific generalization that can be taken as fully verified.
Despite the existence of well-tested theories, science cannot claim absolute knowledge of nature or the behavior of the subject or of the field of study due to
epistemological problems that are unavoidable and preclude the discovery or establishment of absolute
truth. Unlike a mathematical proof, a scientific theory is
empirical, and is always open to
falsification, if new evidence is presented. Even the most basic and fundamental theories may turn out to be imperfect if new observations are inconsistent with them. Critical to this process is making every relevant aspect of research publicly available, which allows ongoing review and repeating of experiments and observations by multiple researchers operating independently of one another. Only by fulfilling these expectations can it be determined how reliable the experimental results are for potential use by others.
Isaac Newton's Newtonian
law of gravitation is a famous example of an established law that was later found not to be universal—it does not hold in experiments involving motion at speeds close to the speed of light or in close proximity of strong gravitational fields. Outside these conditions, Newton's Laws remain an excellent model of motion and gravity. Since general relativity accounts for all the same phenomena that Newton's Laws do and more, general relativity is now regarded as a more comprehensive theory.
[12]Mathematics
Data from the famous
Michelson–Morley experimentMathematics is essential to many 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 mathematical models.
Calculus may be the branch of mathematics most often used in science, but virtually every branch of mathematics has applications in science, including "pure" areas such as
number theory and
topology. Mathematics is fundamental to the understanding of the natural sciences and the social sciences, many of which also rely heavily on
statistics.
Statistical methods, comprised of mathematical techniques for summarizing and exploring data, allow scientists to assess the level of reliability and the range of variation in experimental results. Statistical thinking also plays a fundamental role in many areas of science.
Computational science applies computing power to simulate real-world situations, enabling a better understanding of scientific problems than formal mathematics alone can achieve. According to the
Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, computation is now as important as theory and experiment in advancing scientific knowledge.
[13]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 experimental test of its theories and hypotheses. In practice, mathematical
theorems and
formulas are obtained by
logical derivations which presume
axiomatic systems, rather than a combination of
empirical observation and method of reasoning that has come to be known as
scientific method. In general, mathematics is classified as
formal science, while natural and social sciences are classified as
empirical sciences.
Philosophy of science
Velocity-distribution data of a gas of
rubidium atoms, confirming the discovery of a new phase of matter, the
Bose–Einstein condensate.
Main article:
Philosophy of scienceThe philosophy of science seeks to understand the nature and justification of scientific knowledge. It has proven difficult to provide a definitive
account of the scientific method that can decisively serve to distinguish science from non-science. Thus there are legitimate arguments about exactly where the borders are, leading to the
problem of demarcation. There is nonetheless a set of core precepts that have broad consensus among published philosophers of science and within the
scientific community at large.
Science is reasoned-based analysis of
sensation upon our awareness. As such, the scientific method cannot deduce anything about the realm of
reality that is beyond what is observable by existing or theoretical means.
[14] When a manifestation of our reality previously considered
supernatural is understood in the terms of causes and consequences, it acquires a scientific explanation.
[15]Some of the findings of science can be very
counter-intuitive.
Atomic theory, for example, implies that a granite boulder which appears a heavy, hard, solid, grey object is actually a combination of subatomic
particles with none of these properties, moving very rapidly in space where the mass is concentrated in a very small fraction of the total volume. Many of humanity's
preconceived notions about the workings of the
universe have been challenged by new scientific discoveries.
Quantum mechanics, particularly, examines phenomena that seem to defy our most basic postulates about causality and fundamental understanding of the world around us. Science is the branch of knowledge dealing with people and the understanding we have of our environment and how it works.
There are different schools of thought in the philosophy of scientific method.
Methodological naturalism maintains that scientific investigation must adhere to
empirical study and independent verification as a process for properly developing and evaluating natural explanations for
observable phenomena. Methodological naturalism, therefore, rejects
supernatural explanations,
arguments from authority and biased
observational studies.
Critical rationalism instead holds that unbiased observation is not possible and a demarcation between natural and supernatural explanations is arbitrary; it instead proposes
falsifiability as the landmark of empirical theories and falsification as the universal empirical method. Critical rationalism argues for the ability of science to increase the scope of testable knowledge, but at the same time against its
authority, by emphasizing its inherent
fallibility. It proposes that science should be content with the rational elimination of errors in its theories, not in seeking for their verification (such as claiming
certain or probable proof or disproof; both the proposal and falsification of a theory are only of methodological, conjectural, and tentative character in critical rationalism).
Instrumentalism rejects the concept of truth and emphasizes merely the utility of theories as instruments for explaining and predicting phenomena.
Critiques
Science, pseudoscience and nonscience
Main articles:
Cargo cult science,
Fringe science,
Junk science,
Pseudoscience, and
Scientific misconductAny established body of
knowledge which masquerades as science in an attempt to claim a legitimacy which it would not otherwise be able to achieve on its own terms is not science; it is often known as
fringe- or alternative science. The most important of its defects is usually the lack of the carefully controlled and thoughtfully interpreted experiments which provide the foundation of the natural sciences and which contribute to their advancement. Another term,
junk science, is often used to describe scientific theories or data which, while perhaps legitimate in themselves, are believed to be mistakenly used to support an opposing position. There is usually an element of political or ideological bias in the use of the term. Thus the arguments in favor of limiting the use of fossil fuels in order to reduce global warming are often characterized as junk science by those who do not wish to see such restrictions imposed, and who claim that other factors may well be the cause of global warming. A wide variety of commercial advertising (ranging from hype to outright fraud) would also fall into this category. Finally, there is just plain bad science, which is commonly used to describe well-intentioned but incorrect, obsolete, incomplete, or over-simplified expositions of scientific ideas.
The status of many bodies of knowledge as true sciences, has been a matter of debate. Discussion and debate abound in this topic with some fields like the
social and
behavioural sciences accused by critics of being unscientific. Many groups of people from academicians like Nobel Prize physicist
Percy W. Bridgman,
[16] or Dick Richardson, Ph.D.—Professor of Integrative Biology at the
University of Texas at Austin,
[17] to politicians like U.S. Senator
Kay Bailey Hutchison and other co-sponsors,
[18] oppose giving their support or agreeing with the use of the label "science" in some fields of study and knowledge they consider non-scientific, ambiguous, or scientifically irrelevant compared with other fields.
Karl Popper denied the existence of evidence
[19] and of scientific method.
[20] Popper holds that there is only one universal method, the negative method of
trial and error. It covers not only all products of the human mind, including science, mathematics, philosophy, art and so on, but also the evolution of life.
[21] He also contributed to the
Positivism dispute, a philosophical dispute between
Critical rationalism (
Popper,
Albert) and the
Frankfurt School (
Adorno,
Habermas) about the methodology of the social sciences.
[22]Philosophical focus
Historian
Jacques Barzun 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.
[23] Many recent thinkers, such as
Carolyn Merchant,
Theodor Adorno and
E. F. Schumacher considered that the 17th century
scientific revolution shifted science from a focus on understanding
nature, or
wisdom, to a focus on manipulating nature, i.e.
power, and that science's emphasis on manipulating nature leads it inevitably to manipulate people, as well.
[24] Science's focus on quantitative measures has led to critiques that it is unable to recognize important qualitative aspects of the world.
[24] It is not clear, however, if this kind of criticism is adequate to a vast number of non-experimental scientifics fields like
Astronomy,
Cosmology,
Evolutionary Biology,
Complexity Theory,
Paleontology,
Paleoanthropology,
Archeology,
Earth Sciences,
Climatology,
Ecology and other sciences, like
Statistical Physics of irreversible
non-linear systems, that emphasize systemic and historically contingent frozen accidents. Considerations about the philosophical impact of science to the discussion of the (or lack of) meaning in human existence are not supressed but strongly discussed in the literature of science divulgation, a movement sometimes called
The Third Culture.
The implications of the ideological denial of
ethics for the practice of science itself in terms of fraud, plagiarism, and data falsification, has been criticized by several academics. In "Science and Ethics", the philosopher
Bernard Rollin examines the ideology that denies the relevance of ethics to science, and argues in favor of making education in ethics part and parcel of scientific training.
[25]The media and the scientific debate
The
mass media 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 scientific debate requires considerable expertise on the issue at hand.
[26] Few journalists have real scientific knowledge, and even beat reporters who know a great deal about certain scientific issues may know little about other ones they are suddenly asked to cover.
[27][28]Epistemological inadequacies
Psychologist
Carl Jung believed that though science attempted to understand all of nature, the experimental method used would pose artificial, conditional questions that evoke only partial answers.
[29] Robert Anton Wilson criticized science for using instruments to ask questions that produce answers only meaningful in terms of the instrument, and that there was no such thing as a completely objective vantage point from which to view the results of science.
[30]Scientific community
Main article:
Scientific communityThe 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.
Fields
Main article:
Fields of scienceFields of science are commonly classified along two major lines:
natural sciences, which study
natural phenomena (including
biological life), and
social sciences, which study
human behavior and
societies. These groupings are
empirical sciences, which means the knowledge must be based on
observable phenomena and capable of being
experimented for its
validity by other researchers working under the same conditions.
[31] There are also related disciplines that are grouped into interdisciplinary and applied sciences, such as
engineering and
health science. Within these categories are specialized scientific fields that can include elements of other scientific disciplines but often possess their own terminology and body of expertise.
[32]Mathematics, which is sometimes classified within a third group of science called
formal science, has both similarities and differences with the natural and social sciences.
[31] 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
a priori rather than empirical methods.
[31] Formal science, which also includes
statistics and
logic, is vital to the empirical sciences. Major advances in formal science have often led to major advances in the physical and biological sciences. The formal sciences are essential in the formation of
hypotheses,
theories, and
laws,
[31] both in discovering and describing how things work (natural sciences) and how people think and act (social sciences).
Institutions
Louis XIV visiting the
Académie des sciences in 1671.
Learned societies for the communication and promotion of scientific thought and experimentation have existed since the
Renaissance period.
[33] The oldest surviving institution is the
Accademia dei Lincei in
Italy.
[34] National
Academy of Sciences are distinguished institutions that exist in a number of countries, beginning with the British
Royal Society in 1660
[35] and the French
Académie des Sciences in 1666.
[36]International scientific organizations, such as the
International Council for Science, 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
National Science Foundation in the
U.S.Other prominent organizations include the
academies of science of many nations,
CSIRO in Australia,
Centre national de la recherche scientifique in France,
Max Planck Society and
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft in Germany, and in Spain,
CSIC.
Literature
Main article:
Scientific literatureAn enormous range of
scientific literature is published.
[37] 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 the
Philosophical Transactions, 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.
[38] While
Pubmed lists almost 40,000, related to the medical sciences only.
[39]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 generally considered necessary to communicate the achievements, news, and ambitions of scientists to a wider populace.
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.
Science books engage the interest of many more people. Tangentially, the
science fiction genre, primarily fantastic in nature, engages the public imagination and transmits the ideas, if not the methods, of science.
Recent efforts to intensify or develop links between science and non-scientific disciplines such as
Literature or, more specifically,
Poetry, include the Creative Writing <-> Science resource developed through the
Royal Literary Fund.
[40]
