[昨天,今天和明天的生物]。

P Pirlot
{"title":"[昨天,今天和明天的生物]。","authors":"P Pirlot","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Throughout the history of the biological disciplines from the 18th to the 20th centuries, there has been a succession of predominating fields of interest: morphology, physiology, genetics, biochemistry, ecology and ethology, while statistics, biometry and computer sciences were developing as powerful means of imposing rigor on research. In all sciences, there is a fundamental empiricism which has often been criticized as prescientific. However, it is unavoidable, especially in biology owing to the unusual wealth and complexity of the facts to be reported. Explaining in the natural sciences first requires the discovery of relationships between facts. Biological explanation has many levels. One of the main avenues leading to true explanation is the multidisciplinary approach, which is in reality an attempt at synthesis. Another characteristic of biological work is the equilibrium between pragmatism and idealism, usually expressed as a balance between application and theory. Both modalities are necessary because of their complementarity. The emergence of ecology demonstrates this duality in the recent past. The equilibrium between theory and application should be decided by the biologists themselves, not by the funding public agencies, although competent administrators are necessary for the welfare of researchers. Applied and theoretical research should be kept separate to a large extent, even though they remain interdependent. In biology, theoretical work has suffered considerable neglect as compared to the situation in physics and chemistry. Biology has few explanatory theories and the few it possesses have often been put forward by physicists in the field of biophysics.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)</p>","PeriodicalId":79252,"journal":{"name":"Revue canadienne de biologie experimentale","volume":"42 3","pages":"295-302"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1983-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[Biology yesterday, today and tomorrow].\",\"authors\":\"P Pirlot\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Throughout the history of the biological disciplines from the 18th to the 20th centuries, there has been a succession of predominating fields of interest: morphology, physiology, genetics, biochemistry, ecology and ethology, while statistics, biometry and computer sciences were developing as powerful means of imposing rigor on research. In all sciences, there is a fundamental empiricism which has often been criticized as prescientific. However, it is unavoidable, especially in biology owing to the unusual wealth and complexity of the facts to be reported. Explaining in the natural sciences first requires the discovery of relationships between facts. Biological explanation has many levels. One of the main avenues leading to true explanation is the multidisciplinary approach, which is in reality an attempt at synthesis. Another characteristic of biological work is the equilibrium between pragmatism and idealism, usually expressed as a balance between application and theory. Both modalities are necessary because of their complementarity. The emergence of ecology demonstrates this duality in the recent past. The equilibrium between theory and application should be decided by the biologists themselves, not by the funding public agencies, although competent administrators are necessary for the welfare of researchers. Applied and theoretical research should be kept separate to a large extent, even though they remain interdependent. In biology, theoretical work has suffered considerable neglect as compared to the situation in physics and chemistry. Biology has few explanatory theories and the few it possesses have often been put forward by physicists in the field of biophysics.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":79252,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revue canadienne de biologie experimentale\",\"volume\":\"42 3\",\"pages\":\"295-302\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1983-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revue canadienne de biologie experimentale\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revue canadienne de biologie experimentale","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

从18世纪到20世纪,纵观生物学科的历史,有一系列的主导领域:形态学、生理学、遗传学、生物化学、生态学和动物行为学,而统计学、生物统计学和计算机科学正在发展成为加强研究严谨性的有力手段。在所有科学中,都有一种基本的经验主义,这种经验主义经常被批评为前科学。然而,这是不可避免的,特别是在生物学中,因为要报道的事实异常丰富和复杂。在自然科学中进行解释首先需要发现事实之间的关系。生物学解释有很多层次。导致真正解释的主要途径之一是多学科方法,这实际上是一种综合的尝试。生物学工作的另一个特点是实用主义与理想主义之间的平衡,通常表现为应用与理论之间的平衡。这两种方式都是必要的,因为它们具有互补性。最近生态学的出现证明了这种二元性。理论和应用之间的平衡应该由生物学家自己决定,而不是由资助公共机构决定,尽管称职的管理人员对研究人员的福利是必要的。应用研究和理论研究在很大程度上应该分开,尽管它们仍然相互依存。在生物学中,与物理和化学的情况相比,理论工作受到了相当大的忽视。生物学的解释理论很少,而它拥有的为数不多的理论往往是由生物物理学领域的物理学家提出的。(摘要删节250字)
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
[Biology yesterday, today and tomorrow].

Throughout the history of the biological disciplines from the 18th to the 20th centuries, there has been a succession of predominating fields of interest: morphology, physiology, genetics, biochemistry, ecology and ethology, while statistics, biometry and computer sciences were developing as powerful means of imposing rigor on research. In all sciences, there is a fundamental empiricism which has often been criticized as prescientific. However, it is unavoidable, especially in biology owing to the unusual wealth and complexity of the facts to be reported. Explaining in the natural sciences first requires the discovery of relationships between facts. Biological explanation has many levels. One of the main avenues leading to true explanation is the multidisciplinary approach, which is in reality an attempt at synthesis. Another characteristic of biological work is the equilibrium between pragmatism and idealism, usually expressed as a balance between application and theory. Both modalities are necessary because of their complementarity. The emergence of ecology demonstrates this duality in the recent past. The equilibrium between theory and application should be decided by the biologists themselves, not by the funding public agencies, although competent administrators are necessary for the welfare of researchers. Applied and theoretical research should be kept separate to a large extent, even though they remain interdependent. In biology, theoretical work has suffered considerable neglect as compared to the situation in physics and chemistry. Biology has few explanatory theories and the few it possesses have often been put forward by physicists in the field of biophysics.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信