Is Observation-Based Ecology Scientific?
Questions and criticisms that arise around observational approaches boil down to one fundamental question: “Is this really science?” This question could be asked of any kind of research, but because observational approaches have been out of the scientific
- PDF / 318,526 Bytes
- 22 Pages / 432 x 648 pts Page_size
- 3 Downloads / 243 Views
Is Observation-Based Ecology Scientific?
Questions and criticisms that arise around observational approaches boil down to one fundamental question: “Is this really science?” This question could be asked of any kind of research, but because observational approaches have been out of the scientific mainstream for a long time, and because they invite so many nonscientists as well as investigators from the so-called soft sciences to be part of the life sciences, it is frequently directed at observational studies. So now that these kinds of studies are being integrated into science, the natural follow-up to the fundamental question becomes “Are observational approaches scientific?” There is not just one answer to the question “What is science?” and this means that a number of different philosophies of science have arisen over the years, some more influential than others. Just as the techniques and goals of ecological science are changing, so too will its underlying philosophies. In this chapter, we briefly discuss the most influential scientific philosophies of the last century, particularly falsification and “strong inference.” These philosophies complement the experimental approach to ecology well, but they are sometimes difficult to reconcile with observational approaches. It is because of this mismatch that some have argued that observational approaches are not scientific. We live in a very different ecological world from even a few decades ago and observational approaches are more powerful than ever before. R. Sagarin and A. Pauchard, Observation and Ecology: Broadening the Scope of Science to Understand a Complex World, DOI 10.5822/978-1-61091-230-3_7, © 2012 Rafe Sagarin and Aníbal Pauchard
109
OB SERVAT ION AND EC OLOGY
We suggest that we live in an era when the underlying philosophy of science can expand to be more inclusive of observation-based studies while still justifying experimental and theoretical methods as well. Fortunately for us (because neither of us is a philosopher), other philosophers of science, both past and present, have made this realization and have put forth several variations of more-inclusive ecological philosophies, which we adopt here. Early ecology proceeded by building the observational work of naturalists into theories that were tested against further observations. The philosophical match to this approach is found in early-twentieth century ideas of the “logical positivists,” who believed that scientific theories could be tested by verifying them against observable phenomena. This was an inductive approach that built understanding from layering different levels of evidence until a theory was confirmed. But the mid-twentieth-century science philosopher Karl Popper felt that inductive reasoning could too easily fall victim to pseudoscience. He espoused a philosophy that drew a clear and impenetrable line between what was science and what wasn’t science. In contrast to the logical positivists, Popper argued that science is defined not by what can be proven or verified, but by statem
Data Loading...
