There’s Too Much Science

Sometimes I like to try to remember where I first heard an idea that I think about a lot. From the title of this post, you may guess that the idea I am thinking of has something to do with “too much” of something. I first came across the idea I am thinking of, as far as I remember, in Michael Crichton’s “Terminal Man.” It is, roughly, that a field (in the book, the analogy is to an airplane), has become so complex that one person could never hope to master all the relevant skills and concepts. A brief glance today through the latest Carnival of Evolution, an ongoing series of evolution-related links hosted by popular science bloggers, at the site Pharyngula, convinced me that evolutionary biology is way too big to master. Ecology is way too big to master. The only way to do the science is to choose a topic within it that interests you and pursue mastery of that. I’m not saying this is bad, or unique to science. Novelists can’t be expected to read or even be familiar with all the novels, nor painters to be aware of all paintings. We just trust there is enough overlap, and scrutiny of arguments about the relationships between topics, to ensure consistency. It’s really interesting to me that we voyage through this intellectual sea, making navigational decisions, without the hope of full comprehension of the territory.

note: I dashed this post off yesterday and I have been concerned about being misinterpreted, so I want to clarify this, and maybe complicate it too. Just like a good writer would probably be familiar with the leading lights of the major genera of literature and probably a lot of the tropes and conventions of each, scientists are probably familiar in outline with the major theories and findings of each branch of their field. But it’s probably rare to be able to do cutting edge science in more than one branch. My original point that science, like other creative endeavors, is an idiosyncratic process, stands.

note 2: As I was browsing in the Pacifica Library, my eyes fell on a newer book by David Weinberger called Too Big To Know (Basic Books 2011), and lo and behold, what is Chapter 7’s title? “Too Much Science.”


About aquaticbiology

I'm a person from the San Francisco Bay Area. I like reading, the movies, my family, and biology. I think the science blogosphere is really fantastic and this is my blog about aquatic biology and the life sciences - along with digressions into science-art and commentary. Enjoy!
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to There’s Too Much Science

  1. Gary says:

    With age & experience comes a broader understanding. With those of similar related experiences comes a team greater than the sum of it’s individual parts.

  2. Dane says:

    I think you’re absolutely right. Specialization is the only way to ever truly excel at one thing, unless that one thing is being a generalist. Jack of all trades, master of none is all too real a condition for those who seek to understand it all. Most if not all real cutting edge science ( or music, art, invention, etc…) is done by people whose unilateral focus can perhaps best be described as obsession.

  3. I constantly wonder whether my interests are too broad for me to specialize in that one thing. My problem is I feel just as authentically interested in art and science. I still get really excited when I have an idea for a strum pattern that would express something neat or an idea for a dance that is different from any one I’d come up with before or a line of writing that feels just right, even though I have decided to pursue this course.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s