New knowledge in science is advanced by research from scientists who are motivated by curiosity about the world and a desire to solve problems.[27][28] Contemporary scientific research is highly collaborative and is usually done by teams in academic and
research institutions,[29] government agencies,[30] and companies.[31] 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 participlescīre, meaning "to know".[32]
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".[34] In 1834,
William Whewell introduced the term scientist in a review of
Mary Somerville's book On the Connexion of the Physical Sciences,[35] crediting it to "some ingenious gentleman" (possibly himself).[36]
Science has no single origin. Rather, scientific thinking emerged gradually over the course of tens of thousands of years,[37][38] 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,[39] as did
religious rituals.[40] Some scholars use the term "
protoscience" to label activities in the past that resemble modern science in some but not all features;[41][42][43] however, this label has also been criticised as denigrating,[44] or too suggestive of
presentism, thinking about those activities only in relation to modern categories.[45]
Direct evidence for scientific processes becomes clearer with the advent of
writing systems in early civilisations like
Ancient Egypt and
Mesopotamia, creating the earliest written records in the
history of science in around 3000 to 1200
BCE.[13]: 12–15 [14] 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.[46][13]: 12 From the 3rd millennium BCE, the ancient Egyptians developed a
decimal numbering system,[47] solved practical problems using
geometry,[48] and developed a
calendar.[49] Their healing therapies involved drug treatments and the supernatural, such as prayers,
incantations, and rituals.[13]: 9
In
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.[53] 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,[54] 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".[55]
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.[56] The
Pythagoreans developed a complex number philosophy[57]: 467–68 and contributed significantly to the development of mathematical science.[57]: 465 The
theory of atoms was developed by the Greek philosopher
Leucippus and his student
Democritus.[58][59] 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.[60] The Greek doctor
Hippocrates established the tradition of systematic medical science[61][62] and is known as "
The Father of Medicine".[63]
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.[64] Socrates criticised the older type of study of physics as too purely speculative and lacking in
self-criticism.[65]
Aristotle in the 4th century BCE created a systematic programme of
teleological philosophy.[66] 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.[67] Aristarchus's model was widely rejected because it was believed to violate the laws of physics,[67] while Ptolemy's Almagest, which contains a geocentric description of the
Solar System, was accepted through the early Renaissance instead.[68][69] The inventor and mathematician
Archimedes of Syracuse made major contributions to the beginnings of
calculus.[70]Pliny the Elder was a Roman writer and polymath, who wrote the seminal encyclopaedia Natural History.[71][72][73]
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.[74]
Due to the
collapse of the Western Roman Empire, the 5th century saw an intellectual decline and knowledge of
Greek conceptions of the world deteriorated in Western Europe.[13]: 194 During the period, Latin encyclopaedists such as
Isidore of Seville preserved the majority of general ancient knowledge.[75] In contrast, because the
Byzantine Empire resisted attacks from invaders, they were able to preserve and improve prior learning.[13]: 159 John Philoponus, a Byzantine scholar in the 500s, started to question Aristotle's teaching of physics, introducing the
theory of impetus.[13]: 307, 311, 363, 402 His criticism served as an inspiration to medieval scholars and Galileo Galilei, who extensively cited his works ten centuries later.[13]: 307–308 [76]
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.[77] 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
Caliphate, these Arabic translations were later improved and developed by Arabic scientists.[78] By the 6th and 7th centuries, the neighbouring
Sassanid Empire established the medical
Academy of Gondeshapur, which was considered by Greek, Syriac, and Persian physicians as the most important medical hub of the ancient world.[79]
By the eleventh century most of Europe had become Christian,[13]: 204 and in 1088, the
University of Bologna emerged as the first university in Europe.[86] As such, demand for Latin translation of ancient and scientific texts grew,[13]: 204 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.[87] 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.[88]
New 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.[82]: Book I 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.[89]
In the sixteenth 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.[90]
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.[89][91] 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.[92]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.[93]
The
printing press was widely used to publish scholarly arguments, including some that disagreed widely with contemporary ideas of nature.[94]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.[95] Descartes emphasised individual thought and argued that mathematics rather than geometry should be used to study nature.[96]
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 [speculation]".[99]
Science during the Enlightenment was dominated by
scientific societies and
academies,[100] 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.[101] 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.[102][103]
The 18th century saw significant advancements in the practice of medicine[104] and physics;[105] the development of biological
taxonomy by
Carl Linnaeus;[106] a new understanding of
magnetism and electricity;[107] and the maturation of
chemistry as a discipline.[108] 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.[109] Modern sociology largely originated from this movement.[110] In 1776,
Adam Smith published The Wealth of Nations, which is often considered the first work on modern economics.[111]
During the nineteenth 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.[112] 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.[113]
Early in the 19th century
John Dalton suggested the modern
atomic theory, based on Democritus's original idea of indivisible particles called atoms.[117] 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.[118] 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.[b]
Modern science is commonly divided into three major
branches:
natural science,
social science, and
formal science.[3] Each of these branches comprises various specialised yet overlapping scientific disciplines that often possess their own
nomenclature and expertise.[144] Both natural and social sciences are
empirical sciences,[145] 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.[146]
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.[147] 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.[148] Today, "natural history" suggests observational descriptions aimed at popular audiences.[149]
Social science
Social science is the study of human behaviour and the functioning of societies.[4][5] It has many disciplines that include, but are not limited to
anthropology, economics, history,
human geography,
political science, psychology, and sociology.[4] 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.[4] 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.[4]
Formal science
Formal science is an area of study that generates knowledge using
formal systems.[150][6][7] A formal system is an
abstract structure used for inferring
theorems from
axioms according to a set of rules.[151] It includes mathematics,[152][153]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.[8][154][146] The formal sciences are therefore
a priori disciplines and because of this, there is disagreement on whether they constitute a science.[155][156] Nevertheless, the formal sciences play an important role in the empirical sciences.
Calculus, for example, was initially invented to understand
motion in physics.[157] Natural and social sciences that rely heavily on mathematical applications include
mathematical physics,[158]chemistry,[159]biology,[160]finance,[161] and
economics.[162]
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.[163][12] Engineering is the use of scientific principles to invent, design and build machines, structures and technologies.[164] Science may contribute to the development of new technologies.[165] Medicine is the practice of caring for patients by maintaining and restoring health through the
prevention,
diagnosis, and
treatment of injury or disease.[166][167] 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.[168][169]
Interdisciplinary science involves the combination of two or more disciplines into one,[172] such as
bioinformatics, a combination of biology and computer science[173] or
cognitive sciences. The concept has existed since the ancient Greek period and it became popular again in the 20th century.[174]
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.[175]
Scientific method
Scientific research involves using the
scientific method, which seeks to
objectively explain the events of
nature in a
reproducible way.[176] 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.[2] Mathematics is essential in the formation of
hypotheses,
theories, and laws, because it is used extensively in quantitative modelling, observing, and collecting
measurements.[177] Statistics is used to summarise and analyse data, which allows scientists to assess the reliability of experimental results.[178]
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.[179] 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.[176]: 4–5 [180] 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.[181]
When a hypothesis proves unsatisfactory it is modified or discarded.[182] If the hypothesis survives testing, it may become adopted into the framework of a
scientific theory, a
validlyreasoned, 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.[183]
While performing experiments to test hypotheses, scientists may have a preference for one outcome over another.[184][185] Eliminating the bias can be achieved through transparency, careful
experimental design, and a thorough
peer review process of the experimental results and conclusions.[186][187] 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.[188] Taken in its entirety, the scientific method allows for highly creative problem solving while minimising the effects of subjective and
confirmation bias.[189]Intersubjective verifiability, the ability to reach a consensus and reproduce results, is fundamental to the creation of all scientific knowledge.[190]
Scientific research is published in a range of literature.[191]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.[192]
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.[193]
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.[194] The crisis has long-standing roots; the phrase was coined in the early 2010s[195] 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.[196]
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.[197][198] 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.[199] 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.[200]
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.[201]
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.[202] 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.[203][202]
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.[204]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.[205]
Popper proposed replacing verifiability with
falsifiability as the landmark of scientific theories, replacing induction with
falsification as the empirical method.[205] Popper further claimed that there is actually only one universal method, not specific to science: the negative method of criticism,
trial and error,[206] covering all products of the human mind, including science, mathematics, philosophy, and art.[207]
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.[208] 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.[209]
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.[210] 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.[211]
Finally, 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.[212] Methodological naturalism maintains that science requires strict adherence to
empirical study and independent verification.[213]
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.[214]
Scientists
Scientists are individuals who conduct scientific research to advance knowledge in an area of interest.[215][216] 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 such as a Doctor of Philosophy or PhD.[217] Many scientists pursue careers in various
sectors of the economy such as
academia,
industry,
government, and nonprofit organisations.[218][219][220]
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.[221][222][223]
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.[224] The achievements of women in science have been attributed to the defiance of their traditional role as labourers within the
domestic sphere.[225]
Learned societies
Learned societies for the communication and promotion of scientific thought and experimentation have existed since the Renaissance.[226] Many scientists belong to a learned society that promotes their respective scientific discipline,
profession, or group of related disciplines.[227] Membership may either be open to all, require possession of scientific credentials, or conferred by election.[228] Most scientific societies are nonprofit organisations,[229] 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.
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.[237]
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.[238] 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.[239]
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.[247] 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.[193]
Science 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.[248] 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.[249]
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.[250] 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.[251][252]
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.[253] The science fiction genre, primarily
speculative fiction, can transmit the ideas and methods of science to the general public.[254] 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.[255]
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
COVID-19 is not a major health threat to the US (held by 39% of Americans in August 2021)[256] 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).[257] Psychologists have pointed to four factors driving rejection of scientific results:[258]
Scientific authorities are sometimes seen as inexpert, untrustworthy, or biased.
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.[260] 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.[261]
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.[263] Politicisation of science is usually accomplished when scientific information is presented in a way that emphasises the uncertainty associated with the
scientific evidence.[264] 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.[265] Examples of issues that have involved the politicisation of science include the
global warming controversy,
health effects of pesticides, and
health effects of tobacco.[265][266]
^Ibn al-Haytham's Book of Optics Book I, [6.54]. pages 372 and 408 disputed Claudius Ptolemy's extramission theory of vision; "Hence, the extramission of [visual] rays is superfluous and useless". —A.Mark Smith's translation of the Latin version of
Ibn al-Haytham.[82]: Book I, [6.54]. pp. 372, 408
^Whether the universe is closed or open, or the
shape of the universe, is an open question. The 2nd law of thermodynamics,[118]: 9 [119] and the 3rd law of thermodynamics[120] imply the
heat death of the universe if the universe is a closed system, but not necessarily for an expanding universe.
^
abHeilbron, J.L.; et al. (2003). "Preface". The Oxford Companion to the History of Modern Science. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. vii–x.
ISBN978-0-19-511229-0. ...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.
^
abcdeColander, David C.; Hunt, Elgin F. (2019). "Social science and its methods". Social Science: An Introduction to the Study of Society (17th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge. pp. 1–22.
^
abNisbet, Robert A.; Greenfeld, Liah (16 October 2020).
"Social Science". Encyclopedia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc.
Archived from the original on 2 February 2022. Retrieved 9 May 2021.
^
abFetzer, 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 Academic Publishers. pp. 271–308.
ISBN978-1-4438-1946-6.
^Nickles, Thomas (2013). "The Problem of Demarcation". Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problem. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. p. 104.
^
abcdefghijLindberg, David C. (2007). The beginnings of Western science: the European Scientific tradition in philosophical, religious, and institutional context (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press.
ISBN978-0226482057.
^
abGrant, 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.
ISBN978-0-521-68957-1.
^Keay, John (2000).
India: A history. Atlantic Monthly Press. p.
132.
ISBN978-0-87113-800-2. 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.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. pp. 163–92.
ISBN978-0-226-48205-7.
^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.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. pp. 193–224.
ISBN978-0-226-48205-7.
^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.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. pp. 225–53.
ISBN978-0-226-48205-7.
^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.
ISBN978-0-19-956741-6.
^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.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. pp. 357–368.
ISBN978-0-226-48205-7.
^Cahan, David, ed. (2003). From Natural Philosophy to the Sciences: Writing the History of Nineteenth-Century Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
ISBN978-0-226-08928-7.
^Lightman, Bernard (2011). "13. Science and the Public". In Shank, Michael; Numbers, Ronald; Harrison, Peter (eds.). Wrestling with Nature: From Omens to Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. p. 367.
ISBN978-0-226-31783-0.
^Harrison, Peter (2015). The Territories of Science and Religion. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. pp. 164–165.
ISBN978-0-226-18451-7. 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.
^Lindberg, David C. (2007). "Islamic science". The beginnings of Western science: the European Scientific tradition in philosophical, religious, and institutional context (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. pp. 163–192.
ISBN978-0-226-48205-7.
^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.
ISBN978-0-521-81229-0.
^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.
ISSN1827-4765.
PMID28489015.
^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.
JSTOR124782.
^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.
ISBN978-94-010-8181-8.
^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.
PMID19750597.
S2CID43643053.
^Scott, Colin (2011). "Science for the West, Myth for the Rest?". In Harding, Sandra (ed.). The Postcolonial Science and Technology Studies Reader. Durham: Duke University Press. p. 175.
doi:
10.2307/j.ctv11g96cc.16.
ISBN978-0-8223-4936-5.
OCLC700406626.
^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. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. p. 9.
ISBN978-0-226-31783-0.
^Krebs, Robert E. (2004). Groundbreaking Scientific Experiments, Inventions, and Discoveries of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance.
Greenwood Publishing Group. p. 127.
ISBN978-0313324338.
^Erlich, Ḥaggai; Gershoni, Israel (2000).
The Nile: Histories, Cultures, Myths. Lynne Rienner Publishers. pp. 80–81.
ISBN978-1-55587-672-2.
Archived from the original on 31 May 2022. 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."
^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. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. p. 39.
ISBN978-0-226-31783-0.
^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 UP, 1965.
^Conner, Clifford D. (2005). A People's History of Science: Miners, Midwives, and "Low Mechanicks". New York: Nation Books. pp. 72–74.
ISBN1-56025-748-2.
OCLC62164511.
^Wildberg, Christian (1 May 2018). Zalta, Edward N. (ed.).
The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University.
Archived from the original on 22 August 2019. Retrieved 1 May 2018 – via Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
^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.
^Toomer, G.J. (1964). "Reviewed work: Ibn al-Haythams Weg zur Physik, Matthias Schramm". Isis. 55 (4): 463–65.
doi:
10.1086/349914.
JSTOR228328. See p. 464: "Schramm sums up [Ibn Al-Haytham's] 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: Amsterdam University Press. pp. 99–156.
ISBN978-90-8964-239-4.
^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: Amsterdam University Press. pp. 99–156.
ISBN978-90-8964-239-4.
^Zagorin, Perez (1998). Francis Bacon. Princeton: Princeton University Press. p. 84.
ISBN978-0-691-00966-7.
^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.
ISBN978-0-7139-9503-9. 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
^Swingewood, Alan (1970). "Origins of Sociology: The Case of the Scottish Enlightenment". The British Journal of Sociology. 21 (2): 164–180.
doi:
10.2307/588406.
JSTOR588406.
^Lightman, Bernard (2011). "13. Science and the Public". In Shank, Michael; Numbers, Ronald; Harrison, Peter (eds.). Wrestling with Nature: From Omens to Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. p. 367.
ISBN978-0-226-31783-0.
^Leahey, Thomas Hardy (2018). "The psychology of consciousness". A History of Psychology: From Antiquity to Modernity (8th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge. pp. 219–253.
ISBN978-1-138-65242-2.
^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.
ISBN978-0-7503-0224-1.
^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.
S2CID34844169.
^Rosser, Sue V. (12 March 2012). Breaking into the Lab: Engineering Progress for Women in Science. New York: New York University Press. p. 7.
ISBN978-0-8147-7645-2.
^Futuyma, Douglas J.; Kirkpatrick, Mark (2017). "Chapter 1: Evolutionary Biology".
Evolution (4th ed.). Sinauer. pp. 3–26.
ISBN978-1605356051.
Archived from the original on 31 May 2022. Retrieved 30 May 2022.
^Miller, Arthur I. (1981). Albert Einstein's special theory of relativity. Emergence (1905) and early interpretation (1905–1911). Reading: Addison–Wesley.
ISBN978-0-201-04679-3.
^Gauch, Hugh G. Jr. (2003).
"Science in perspective". Scientific Method in Practice. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. pp. 21–73.
ISBN978-0-521-01708-4.
Archived from the original on 25 December 2020. Retrieved 3 September 2018.
^Oglivie, Brian W. (2008). "Introduction". The Science of Describing: Natural History in Renaissance Europe (Paperback ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. pp. 1–24.
ISBN978-0-226-62088-6.
^"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.
^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.
S2CID9272212.
^Bill, Thompson (2007). "2.4 Formal Science and Applied Mathematics". The Nature of Statistical Evidence. Lecture Notes in Statistics. Vol. 189. Springer. p. 15.
^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.
ISBN978-0-7658-0413-6.
^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: SpringerNature. pp. 201–218.
ISBN978-3-319-27494-2.
^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): 102–04.
doi:
10.1152/advan.00001.2004.
PMID15319191.
S2CID21610124.
^Nissani, M. (1995). "Fruits, Salads, and Smoothies: A Working definition of Interdisciplinarity". The Journal of Educational Thought. 29 (2): 121–128.
JSTOR23767672.
^
abdi Francia, Giuliano Toraldo (1976). "The method of physics". The Investigation of the Physical World. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. pp. 1–52.
ISBN978-0-521-29925-1. 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!
^Bulger, Ruth Ellen; Heitman, Elizabeth; Reiser, Stanley Joel (2002). The Ethical Dimensions of the Biological and Health Sciences (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
ISBN978-0-521-00886-0.
OCLC47791316.
^Ziman, John (1978c).
"Common observation". Reliable knowledge: An exploration of the grounds for belief in science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp.
42–76.
ISBN978-0-521-22087-3.
^Subramanyam, Krishna; Subramanyam, Bhadriraju (1981). Scientific and Technical Information Resources. CRC Press.
ISBN978-0-8247-8297-9.
OCLC232950234.
^
abBush, Vannevar (July 1945).
"Science the Endless Frontier". National Science Foundation.
Archived from the original on 7 November 2016. Retrieved 4 November 2016.
^Feynman, Richard (1974).
"Cargo Cult Science". Center for Theoretical Neuroscience. Columbia University. Archived from
the original on 4 March 2005. Retrieved 4 November 2016.
^"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.
^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). Zalta, Edward N. (ed.).
"Thomas Kuhn". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Archived from the original on 15 July 2020. Retrieved 26 October 2015.
^Brugger, E. Christian (2004). "Casebeer, William D. Natural Ethical Facts: Evolution, Connectionism, and Moral Cognition". The Review of Metaphysics. 58 (2).
^"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.
^Whaley, Leigh Ann (2003). Women's History as Scientists. Santa Barbara, California: ABC-CLIO, INC.
^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.
ISBN978-0-253-20968-9.
^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.
PMID320157.
S2CID32956693.
^Marburger, John Harmen III (10 February 2015). Science policy up close. Crease, Robert P. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
ISBN978-0-674-41709-0.
OCLC875999943.
^Gauch, Hugh G. (2012). Scientific Method in Brief. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 7–10.
ISBN9781107666726.