Talk:Science/Outline
See Talk:Science/Outline discussion for discussion on this draft outline
- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
- Okay, I've closed this for the time being so we can focus on content, sourcing and then copyediting. I figure if there is overwhelming consensus to revisit layout, then that can be done way down the track. So time to shift focus elsewhere. Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:42, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
- Lede
Etymology, History and Philosophy
[edit]Etymology of Science
[edit]History of Science
[edit]- Needham's Grand Question
- Formulations
- Why didn't science arise in China? -- Falsified by Lu Gwei-djen's dad in 1930s & afterward
- Why didn't scientific method arise in China? -- somewhat justified by POV of Taoism
- Why didn't science and civilization recover as fast in the Ming dynasty (Needham calls Ming science 'decadent'. The Ming came after the Mongols -- the Yuan dynasty) as compared to Europe of the same epoch
- Fara's version, p.53 'the Needham problem' Why didn't the mathematical natural science happening during European Renaissance also occur in China?
- Fara's version (p.54) of Nathan Sivin's answer to 'Needham problem': China's feudal society had not evolved mercantile capitalism, as was occurring in Europe at that time.
- NB: Needham was 94 by the time of his last contributions to 1995 SCC 7.2, having expended his life falsifying the question. I find SCC 7.2 to be a repetitive shadow of the SCC volumes from 50 years earlier.
- Fara's restatement (p.54) of 'Needham problem': "How did European activities lead to the form of science that now dominates the entire world?"
- NB see the graphs in 7.2 which shows how soon China's science integrated with rest of world's science. Chinese medicine, in particular has not yet integrated, in Needham's graphs.
- Fara, Patricia (2009) Science : a four thousand year history Oxford: Oxford University Press ISBN 978-0-19-922689-4 pp.53-54. See entire chapter, "China", as well as Notes, and Sources --Ancheta Wis (talk) 19:43, 19 October 2011 (UTC), and 01:27, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
- Formulations
Pre-modern Science
[edit]- Ancient Near East
- Greek world
- India
- China
- Islamic world
- Medieval Europe
Modern Science
[edit]- Early Modern Europe
- Modern Science (In text links to disciplinary histories)
Philosophy
[edit]- The concept of natural law, and the nature of truth
- Critique of the possibility of the above (Popper, Kuhn, Lakatos, Feyerabend)
Deductive science
[edit]- Formal deduction
- Limits of deduction (Russell, Godel)
- Contemporary responses
Inductive science
[edit]- Induction
- Arguments against induction (Hume)
- Positivism (Popper; Durkheim)
- Constructivist approaches (Kuhn, Lakatos; ?Habermas, ?Foucault)
- Anything that pops up in field review articles from the last 20 years of Philosophy of Science journals we haven't got
Scientific practice
[edit]Research program
[edit]Mathematics and formal sciences
[edit]- Proof
- Completeness
- Internal consistency
Scientific method
[edit]Theory and Hypothesis
[edit]- Prediction as compared with
- Explanation
Test, Experiment, Observation
[edit]Analysis
[edit]- Quantitative method, regression searching (econometrics)
- Qualitative method
- Discourse analysis, etc.
Research reporting and peer review
[edit]- Scientific publication, academic journal
- Peer review, review article, large scale reviews
Scientific community
[edit]Branches and fields
[edit]Institutions
[edit]- Learned societies
- Research councils
- Academic journals
Literature
[edit]Women in science
[edit]Science and society
[edit]Science and Technology
[edit]Science policy
[edit]Politics and public perception of science
[edit]Media perspectives
[edit]Pseudoscience, fringe science, and junk science
[edit]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.