Biology Not a Science? I Prove It!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pengwuino
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Biology Science
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the claim that biology is not a science, with participants presenting various arguments and counterarguments regarding the nature of biology compared to other scientific fields. The scope includes conceptual reasoning, personal anecdotes, and humorous commentary.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • One participant argues that the presence of attractive individuals in biology majors undermines the scientific credibility of the field.
  • Another claims that biology's frequent media coverage, particularly on evolution, indicates a lack of genuine scientific interest among the public.
  • Concerns are raised about the perception of biologists, suggesting that they do not evoke the same awe as physicists or chemists.
  • Some participants express that biology involves too much memorization and lacks the formulas characteristic of other sciences.
  • There is a claim that biology does not produce "explosive" results, which some participants associate with the excitement of science.
  • Discussion includes a humorous take on spelling errors related to the term "biology" compared to other sciences.
  • One participant notes that the representation of biologists on television often skews towards women, which they argue detracts from the field's scientific status.
  • Counterarguments highlight that biology does involve formulas and calculations, particularly in areas like microbiology and genetics.
  • Some participants mention the role of biology in addressing real-world issues, such as medicine and environmental cleanup.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with no consensus reached on whether biology qualifies as a science. Some defend biology's scientific status, while others maintain the original claim that it does not meet the criteria of a science.

Contextual Notes

Participants' arguments are based on personal perceptions and humorous observations rather than established scientific criteria. The discussion reflects a mix of serious and light-hearted commentary, with varying levels of engagement with the topic.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may interest individuals exploring the boundaries of scientific disciplines, as well as those curious about the cultural perceptions of different fields of study.

  • #31
Pengwuino said:
I believe I have found proof that infact, biology is NOT a science.

My proof is as followed:

1) There are too many good looking chicks who are biology majors

This is self-explanatory
The number of good looking chicks majoring in biology has nothing to do with whether biology is a science or not.

I think it has more to do with the fact that women tend to be more obsessed with sex than men. Having sex isn't enough for them. They have to study every detail about it, including when and how other species do it.

For men, sex may be something fun to do in the backseat of a car, but as soon as its over, they're on to more pressing matters, such as:

Guy: "Aha! That's it. That's definitely it!"

Girl: "What's it?"

Guy: "See that 'star'? It was by that other group of stars before we started and now it's next to this group of stars over here! That's definitely a geosynchronous satellite. In fact, it's the Advanced Communications Technology Satellite intended to prove that a Ka Band system with onboard switching could reliably provide digital integrated services for all types of applications and data rates, and operate seamlessly with terrestrial networks. It's currently out of fuel, so the operators from the John Glenn Space Operations Center near Cleveland positioned it in a gravity valley and let the inclination drift to extend its life. It will eventually drift up to an inclination of about 15 degrees, then drift back down into an equatorial orbit, all within the next 26 to 27 years or so."

To which the biology major is sure to ignorantly reply, "But, isn't that star in the Southwest? I thought Cleveland was Northeast of us."

(Of course, this wouldn't apply to Evo. She would be fascinated that there's bandwidth beyond Ku and that it could be used just as effectively. :biggrin: )
 
Biology news on Phys.org
  • #32
Tsu said:
Hangover, smangover. No excuses, my lad. You are hereby arrested by the grammar Police. You'll have to come down to the station with me. Come along, now... :smile: :smile: :smile:
Grammer?

You are hereby arrested by the Spelling Police. You'll have to come along with me. Bring your prisoner, as well!:approve: :smile: :biggrin:
 
  • #33
BobG said:
Or maybe that's the business/art majors that use those - unless they use 'splatter charts', but I think the folks training to become EMTs use those.


Hey leave me outa this!
 
  • #34
BobG said:
(Of course, this wouldn't apply to Evo. She would be fascinated that there's bandwidth beyond Ku and that it could be used just as effectively. :biggrin: )
Damn, you have a good memory. :biggrin: Wasn't that thread about the effects of rain on transmissions? Or was that whiskers on kittens?
 
  • #35
Certainly, I agree that Biology is all about memorization. But we all know that memorization is a function of the brain. It's widely obvious. Well, how can we know that? Why is it obvious? Due to the study of brain functions, by a discipline called Biology.

I would define science, informally, as the willing to discover due to insatiable curiousity. Biology is all about discovering the biosphere that surrounds us. And Karl Popper defined science in his book, Logic of Scientic Discovery. And I can assure you, Biology fits in that category.

Rutherfor said something like this: "All science is either physics or stamp collecting. And I hate stamps.". Well, he won the Chemistry Nobel Prize in 1908. Does it sounds familiar to you?

Physics are very important to Biology that's for sure. But Physics are just a tool to Biology, like Biology is equally able to be a tool to Chemistry (for example). In conclusion, all science is important but you can allways have a preferred one.

If you want to prove your point of view, start by reviewing your post's fallacies and read something about the matter to help you.

PS: Sorry for my english.

Usefull Links

http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/popper_falsification.html"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #36
Kalouste said:
Certainly, I agree that Biology is all about memorization. But we all know that memorization is a function of the brain. It's widely obvious. Well, how can we know that? Why is it obvious? Due to the study of brain functions, by a discipline called Biology.

I would define science, informally, as the willing to discover due to insatiable curiousity. Biology is all about discovering the biosphere that surrounds us. And Karl Popper defined science in his book, Logic of Scientic Discovery. And I can assure you, Biology fits in that category.

Rutherfor said something like this: "All science is either physics or stamp collecting. And I hate stamps.". Well, he won the Chemistry Nobel Prize in 1908. Does it sounds familiar to you?

Physics are very important to Biology that's for sure. But Physics are just a tool to Biology, like Biology is equally able to be a tool to Chemistry (for example). In conclusion, all science is important but you can allways have a preferred one.

PS: Sorry for my english.

Usefull Links

http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/popper_falsification.html"


You know that saying that Biology is really Chemistry is really Physics is really Mathematics is really Philosophy? Well then.. carry on
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #37
lol and physics and math is not about memorization? what happen to those fundamental formulas? Granted biology probably has more fundamentals because its scale or field maybe larger but math still has its memorizable formulas.
I think there are better looking girls in psychology...and if you don't call psychology a science i'ma shoot you all...

sucks thought that when i got my yearbook, it say s I'm a psych major ARGH!
 
  • #38
Kalouste said:
Certainly, I agree that Biology is all about memorization.
Why is that, I really don't see. The only thing I need memorized is what the one letter abbreviations of amino acids are, or what the pairing of the different bases is. To practice biology you need to have a thorough understanding of physics, chemistry, mathematics and statistics (AND biological systems). I know plenty of people who are biologists and go to CERN or NMR-institutes to decipher the structures of biological molecules and use that to their advantage in their studies.
 
  • #39
I think Biology is much more about memorization than physics, math, etc. Why? Well, if you don't know a formula in math for example, you can infer it with some calculations (many formulas). In Biology you would have to do experiments to prove if the formula or the statement you're referring to is true. We don't have that time, so we memorize it (concerning to the great majority of biology stuff, I feel this). Probably I don't know enough to discuss this matter (I don't know much about Biology) so I might be wrong. What do you think?

PS: Monique you said it well (I can't express myself in proper english): Physics, math need Biology (eg. Someone that deals with DNA in statistic needs to know some Biology, even if their background is statistic.). And Biology needs the other disciplines. In the end it's all about science.
 
Last edited:
  • #40
biology has much more memorisations (much more than formulas). its like remember the name of every plant found in (place your country). how many species of animals can be found in (place your country)?
what is the scientific name of mushroom.
what are the life stages of a bee...
which animal's RBC doesn't have a nucleus in it?
what parasite causes malaria?
what is the bone of thigh called?
OMG, why the hell do i have to learn all that and get bad reports if i can't remember it all?
this is why biology has much memorisations.
 
  • #41
BobG said:
"See that 'star'? It was by that other group of stars before we started and now it's next to this group of stars over here! That's definitely a geosynchronous satellite. In fact, it's the Advanced Communications Technology Satellite intended to prove that a Ka Band system with onboard switching could reliably provide digital integrated services for all types of applications and data rates, and operate seamlessly with terrestrial networks. It's currently out of fuel, so the operators from the John Glenn Space Operations Center near Cleveland positioned it in a gravity valley and let the inclination drift to extend its life. It will eventually drift up to an inclination of about 15 degrees, then drift back down into an equatorial orbit, all within the next 26 to 27 years or so."
:smile: Good one Bob, worthy of a PF Technology or Engineering Guru. Actually, that would probably describe me, although I didn't know about the bandwidth part.

BobG said:
She would be fascinated that there's bandwidth beyond Ku and that it could be used just as effectively.
Strangely, I would find such a woman very appealing. Watching stars together would be very romantic.

As for biology and memorization, in chemistry one has to memorize elements, componds, reactions, . . . etc, and in phyiscs, one has to memorize particles and their characteristics, conservation laws, forumulas (some of which can be derived), and so on, and even in math, there is a certain amount of memorization. All have to do with some understanding of the universe.
 
  • #42
In my abstract algebra class we had definition quizzes! If that is not memorization I don't know what is.
 
  • #43
Kalouste said:
I think Biology is much more about memorization than physics, math, etc. Why?
To the extent that this is true, it is just that the subject field is, simply speaking, intractable to mathematical modelling. To establish a system of differential equations whose solution would capture&predict, say, the behaviour of an organism is way too difficult. (Not to mention the computing power you'd need to set aside in order to SOLVE the equations..)
 
  • #44
mattmns said:
In my abstract algebra class we had definition quizzes! If that is not memorization I don't know what is.

Really good point.

Also, if you did forget a formula, would you really want to work it out all over again (if a long one)? I definitely wouldn't, especially not during an exam, so I guess it's best to memorize. This for applied mathematics of course.
 
  • #45
iansmith said:
In conclusion, your research was poorly done and don't blame biology if it is cool and you are not.
:biggrin: :smile: :-p Well said, Ian!

*Deducts 10 GOOBF cards from Penguwino.*
 
  • #46
Biologists are hippies anyway..
 
  • #47
cronxeh said:
Biologists are hippies anyway..
Hardly! If I had more time, I'd argue more with you all, but I'm going to spoil all your fun and disappear to do an actual experiment (and now that there's an inch of snow on the ground, I need to leave extra time to get out).
 
  • #48
Kalouste said:
I think Biology is much more about memorization than physics, math, etc. Why? Well, if you don't know a formula in math for example, you can infer it with some calculations (many formulas).
Some others said it already, but you wouldn't want to re-invent some physical theory right? You would probably memorize it or at least make a mental note. Your calculations are our experiments. It's like those particle colliders. You don't do the experiment over and over again, you publish the data and refer to the information when needed.

I once did a course of rheology, I had to memorize all those fluid dynamical formulas.. that wasn't fun. Or radioactive decay where you have to memorize the different half times of radioactive isotopes, know how they decay and the formula how to calculate how long it takes before it has decayed to appropriate levels. Memorization is everywhere.
 
  • #49
mattmns said:
In my abstract algebra class we had definition quizzes! If that is not memorization I don't know what is.

Every subject has memorization in this form, you have to learn the language used in a particular field before you have any hope of understanding what's going on.
 
  • #50
___ said:
biology has much more memorisations (much more than formulas). its like remember the name of every plant found in (place your country). how many species of animals can be found in (place your country)?
what is the scientific name of mushroom.
what are the life stages of a bee...
which animal's RBC doesn't have a nucleus in it?
what parasite causes malaria?
what is the bone of thigh called?
OMG, why the hell do i have to learn all that and get bad reports if i can't remember it all?
this is why biology has much memorisations.
What different sub-atomic particles come out of a neutron, what are the spins of all the different quarks, what is the name of the 3rd orbit of the electron, demonstrate the aufbauw principle, what atom has the weight of 15.999, what is the third planet from the sun, in what galaxy are we in, how does uranium decay, blablabla.
 
  • #51
lol monique nice example
 
  • #52
Quarks, +-1/2, 3rd orbital :-p , auf-wha?, oxygen, earth, milkyway, ... hmm don't remember that one. Wait I'm not taking a test. Doh.
 
  • #53
OMG, this thread was supposed to be a joke and you people made it all serious!

It must be a sign that it's the end of the world.

What's wrong with you people? This is General Discussion. :bugeye:
 
  • #54
Moonbear said:
Hardly! If I had more time, I'd argue more with you all, but I'm going to spoil all your fun and disappear to do an actual experiment (and now that there's an inch of snow on the ground, I need to leave extra time to get out).


Pfffbt, right..

you probably drive an acid green Volkswagen Beetle :biggrin:
 
  • #55
Pengwuino said:
5) Nothing explosive is made

Explosive things are the secret "coolness" of science. Biology doesn't like to blow things up. I do.
But in biology they make Biological Weapons of mass desertion.
 
  • #56
Evo said:
OMG, this thread was supposed to be a joke and you people made it all serious!
It must be a sign that it's the end of the world.
What's wrong with you people? This is General Discussion.
No, it's just good natured retaliation - all in good fun. :biggrin:
 
  • #57
Evo said:
OMG, this thread was supposed to be a joke and you people made it all serious!
It must be a sign that it's the end of the world.
What's wrong with you people? This is General Discussion. :bugeye:

Yes! My points exactly! Smite them Evo, smite them all with your powerful wand of modship!
 
  • #58
Pengwuino said:
I believe I have found proof that infact, biology is NOT a science.

My proof is as followed:

1) There are too many good looking chicks who are biology majors

This is self-explanatory.

heh, that amuses me, cause just the other day in lab, i destroyed all of physics. I've since concluded it was because i was too damned good looking. poor physics, it didn't stand a chance.
 
  • #59
Gale said:
heh, that amuses me, cause just the other day in lab, i destroyed all of physics.
Is that why I keep floating up to the ceiling tonight? :bugeye:
 
  • #60
Gale said:
heh, that amuses me, cause just the other day in lab, i destroyed all of physics. I've since concluded it was because i was too damned good looking. poor physics, it didn't stand a chance.

Oh darn, there goes all my funding! Now I'll have to hunt for a new subject. Gale: STAY AWAY FROM THE CHEMISTRY LABS!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
11K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 76 ·
3
Replies
76
Views
7K