Derry - What science is and how it works

WHAT SCIENCE IS AND HOW IT WORKS

WHAT SCIENCE IS AND HOW IT WORKS

GREGORY N. DERRY

PRINCETON UNIVERSITY PRESS

PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY

Copyright 1999 by Princeton University Press

Published by Princeton University Press, 41 William Street,

Princeton, New Jersey 08540

In the United Kingdom: Princeton University Press,

Chichester, West Sussex

All Rights Reserved.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Derry, Gregory Neil, 1952

What science is and how it works /

Gregory N. Derry.

p. cm.

Includes bibliographical references and index.

eISBN 1-4008-0162-1

1. Science. I. Title.

Q158.5.D47 1999 500dc21 99-17186 CIP

This book has been composed in Sabon

http://pup.princeton.edu

To Paula and Rebecca

WHAT SCIENCE IS AND HOW IT WORKS

S CIENCE, like many other topics, is much more interesting if it makes sense to you. I wrote this book because science is extraordinarily interesting to me, and I want to share that interest with other people. My goal for the book is to convey the foundations of my own understanding of science, which I have acquired over an extended period of time. Scholars argue over whether science is a body of knowledge, a collection of techniques, a social and intellectual process, a way of knowing, a strictly defined method, and so forth. These arguments are not very interesting to me, since I accept all of these elements as valid partial visions of science. In one guise or another, they all appear somewhere in the book. My other motivation for writing the book is to show that science, as well as being interesting, is also important. A significant part of our culture, our economy, and our environment are entangled with science in profound ways. To comprehend the world we live in without some grasp of science is difficult. Crucial issues are at stake, and these issues require an understanding of science in order to approach them intelligently.

The audience for this book is anybody with some curiosity about the issues I explore. No particular background is assumed. In writing, I especially had in mind a reader who enjoys ideas but hasnt studied the sciences in any depth. People who have a scientific background will also find the book of interest, but I primarily had in mind people who are not experts. In fact, my underlying assumption is that you dont need any particular expertise to have a genuine understanding of what science is and how science works.

In order to keep the scope of the book manageable, I am using the word science to mean natural science. (This is merely a convenient convention, not intended to reflect any opinion about the relative worth of the disciplines Im not including.) The social sciences, mathematics, and engineering are sometimes discussed briefly, but the main focus of the book is on chemistry, biology, physics, and the earth sciences. I have tried to avoid any prejudice in favor of a particular discipline. I have also tried to avoid favoring either the laboratory sciences or the historical/observational sciences. My own background is in physics, and that may have colored my treatment and choice of topics. Nevertheless, I have tried to maintain a broad transdisciplinary flavor.

A number of books already try to explain science to the general public. I would like to articulate why I have written another one and why what I have tried to accomplish is different. My overarching goal is to give the reader more than just a description of how other people (scientists) think about the world; I want to communicate this thought process to readers in a way that enables them to actually engage in a similar thought process. My other claim to novelty is the distinctive combination of different approaches Ive employed: historical narratives, integrative cross-disciplinary ideas and concepts, comparisons with other (nonscientific) endeavors, and characteristically scientific tactics for thinking about the world. Lastly, I have put a lot of effort into presenting substantial ideas in a way that does not oversimplify these ideas into fluff, but also does not bore the reader to death. Of course, I dont want to promise too much. I have covered a lot of ground in just a few hundred pages. For every topic I discuss, multiple volumes have been written. I can only scratch the surface here and try to illuminate the major points of each issue with broad brush-strokes. But despite these limitations, my intention is to get to the heart of the matter in every case.

I have generally avoided expressing personal opinions on controversial issues (social, political, or scientific), opting instead to present all sides as fairly as I could. On the other hand, there are also sections of the book where I have presented views that reflect a broad consensus among many reasonable people, though other opinions may exist. In a few places, I express personal opinions because I could not see any way to avoid it; I have clearly indicated those passages that present no ones thinking but my own.

Finally, because this book contains so many interrelated ideas, I have employed quite a few cross-references throughout. This practice allows readers (optionally) to find useful information and background when unfamiliar ideas appear. My intention is to allow the book to be read in an order other than from beginning to end. If you are one of those readers who is well-adapted to the new electronic age, you can think of these cross-references as hypertext links and pretend you are clicking a mouse as you turn to the indicated page.

I have many debts to acknowledge regarding the creation of this book, which is based on many years of prior work. My thinking during all that time has been influenced by many teachers, colleagues, and friends. Among my teachers, Prof. C. D. Swartz stands out as the first person who introduced me to real science. The rest of my teachers and colleagues who have contributed to my thinking over the years are too numerous to mention. Many of my friends have influenced my thinking in important ways; Scott Wittet, Paul Ferguson, and Christine High deserve special mention.

A number of people have also contributed more directly to the development of the book. Betsy Reeder, Dan Perrine, Fr. Frank Haig, S.J., and Peter French have all read portions of the manuscript, offering both criticism and encouragement. Randy Jones and Helene Perry read through an entire early version, offering me a variety of suggestions for improvement. Two anonymous reviewers carefully and thoroughly read this early version and also a completed later version, in both cases providing me with many corrections and recommendations. Judy Dobler made a very careful and critical reading of some early chapters, and supplied me with a remarkably voluminous set of notes and stylistic comments; everything I wrote afterward was influenced by these suggestions. And Trevor Lipscombe was able to see possibilities for this book that I had not been able to see myself.

I would also like to acknowledge my institution, Loyola College, for providing a sabbatical leave during which the writing of this book was started. There is no possibility that the book could exist if I had not had that unencumbered period of time to focus on it.

Finally, I owe several debts to my family, Paula and Rebecca Derry. They have supported this arduous venture in many ways, including encouragement. My daughter, Rebecca, has checked passages for clarity, caught some typographical and grammatical mistakes, and contributed to the figures. My wife, Paula, has read a great deal of the manuscript, offering incisive critical comments on both content and style. She has also greatly influenced my thinking about a number of key issues for many years prior to the writing of the book. (I should also mention the cats, Katie and Smokey, who amused me by walking across the keyboard as I tried to think of something suitable to write.)