BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Adrian Wenner <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 5 Nov 2001 15:02:35 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (66 lines)
   Recently, several subscribers contributed to the question of why
progress is so slow in science, notably George Imrie and Peter Borst.

   Much of the problem lies with the mentorship training of scientists.
For instance, virtually no one in biology gets exposed to the philosophy,
psychology, and sociology of science (that is, science as a process, not as
a way of gaining ultimate truth).  Strong biases held by major professors
become inculated into the minds of their students.  The peer review process
(made up of such professors and their former students) then tends to
maintain the status quo rather than serve as a vehicle for rapid progress
in science.  (See the epigraph in my signature, below.)

   I covered this material in an invited review paper, as follows:

1997  Wenner, A.M.  The role of controversy in animal behavior.  Pages 3-37
in Greenberg, C. and E. Tobach (eds).  Comparative Psychology of
Invertebrates:The Field and Laboratory Study of Insect Behavior.  Garland
Publishing, New York.

   As you will note, the editors of that volume apparently thought highly
enough of that contribution that they placed it first in their volume.
Controversy erupts in science when someone proposes an idea that disrupts
prevailing thinking.  An ecologist once summarized the slow process that
results, as follows (paraphrased):

1)  That new idea is heresy!

2)  Evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of the old idea!

   --- and eventually ---

3)  We've known that all along!

   As physicist Andrew Strominger wrote:  "The history of physics is the
history of giving up cherished ideas."  The history of biology is the same;
it just takes biologists longer than physicists to abandon cherished ideas.


**********

   If enough subscribers show interest, perhaps Barry Birkey might wish to
include that publication in the following website:

  http://www.beesource.com/pov/wenner/index.htm)

  Although lengthy, I can also photocopy the article at my own expense and
mail it those truly interested in some of the reasons why scientific
progress is so slow.

                                                        Adrian



Adrian M. Wenner                    (805) 963-8508 (home phone)
967 Garcia Road                     (805) 893-8062  (UCSB FAX)
Santa Barbara, CA  93106  [http://www.beesource.com/pov/wenner/index.htm]

********************************************************************
*
*    "However broad-minded one may be, he is always to some extent
*  the slave of his education and of his past."
*
*                           Emile Duclaux (1896; 1920 translation)
*
********************************************************************

ATOM RSS1 RSS2