科學(英语:Science,希臘語:Επιστήμη)是通過經驗實證的方法,對自然現象進行歸因的学科。科学活动所得的知识是条件明确的(不能模棱两可或随意解读)、能经得起检验的,而且不能与任何适用范围内的已知事实产生矛盾。科学原仅指对自然现象之规律的探索与总结,但人文学科也越来越多地被冠以“科学”之名。
人们习惯根据研究对象的不同把科学划分为不同的类别,传统的自然科学主要有生物學、物理學、化學、地球科學和天文學。逻辑学和数学的地位比较特殊,它们是其它一切科学的论证基础和工具。
科学在认识自然的不同层面上设法解决各种具体的问题,强调预测结果的具体性和可证伪性,这有别于空泛的哲学。科学也不等同于寻求绝对无误的真理,而是在现有基础上,摸索式地不断接近真理。故科学的发展史就是一部人类对自然界的认识偏差的纠正史。 Go to Article
西罗马帝国因蛮族入侵而覆灭,导致欧洲西部的知识界在5世纪时出现了衰退。与此相反,东罗马帝国(又称作拜占庭帝国)抵挡住了蛮族的进攻,保存且改进了古典时代的学问。6世纪的拜占庭学者约翰·菲约波诺斯(英语:John Philoponus)(古希臘語:Ιωάννης ο Φιλόπονος)是第一位质疑亚里士多德在物理学方面的说教并注意到了其缺陷的学者。约翰·菲约波诺斯对亚里士多德物理学原理的批评成为中世纪学者的灵感来源,并启发了一千年后科学革命时代的伽利略,后者在其著作中举例说明亚里士多德物理学的缺陷时广泛援引了菲约波诺斯[37][38]。
作为启蒙时代的先导,艾萨克·牛顿和戈特弗里德·莱布尼茨成功建立了一种如今称为经典力学的新型物理学,这门学问可以被实验验证,可以用数学解释。莱布尼茨亦从亚里士多德物理学借用了一些术语,然而是在新的、非目的论的意义上使用,如“能量”和“势能”(亚里士多德的实现(energeia)与潜能(potentia)(英语:actuality and potentiality)之近代版)。这体现出对客体的观念之转变:曾被亚里士多德指出具备特定的、可以实现的内禀目标的客体,如今被认为没有什么内禀目标。以弗朗西斯·培根的方式,莱布尼茨假定,所有不同类型的事物皆遵照相同的自然法则运行,而并不拥有个个不同的形式因或目的因。也正是在这个时期,“科学”这个词被越来越经常的用以指代对某种类型的知识的某种类型的探求,特别是对自然知识的探求,这就与古老的“自然哲学”这个词的涵义逐渐趋近了。
1665年1月,世界上第一个人文类学术期刊《学者周刊》(Journal des Sçavans)创刊。同年3月,第一个理工类研究杂志《自然科学会报》创刊。此后,学术类期刊数量逐步增多。1981年时,曾有人估计当时的全球的学术期刊总数已达11500份。[83]仅与生命科学有关的学术杂志,在美国国家医学图书馆中就已列举出5千份。虽涵盖39种语言,但其中九成是英文杂志。[84]
评价学术期刊影响力的常见参考标准之一是看其影响指數(IF)的大小。影响指数高的期刊会更引人关注。过于强调影响指数的作用则是一种迷信的行为。另外,影响指数评价的是期刊在一段时期内所有论文的平均影响力,而有些人误把影响指数当作了判断特定论文及其投稿人的水平标准。[88]在知名期刊发表论文的研究者更易获得更多的科研经费。由于知名期刊的关注度更高,所以时间有限的人会优先阅览知名期刊,长此以往,在知名期刊投稿的作者的被引用几率会越来越大,而在不知名期刊投稿的作者的被引用几率会越来越小,造成评价标准越来越不公平的恶性循环。[89]影响指数的提出者尤金·嘎菲德(Eugene Garfield)也指出同一期刊中不同文章的水平是不一样的,不能一概而论,更不该作为评价个人能力的标准。[90]一种变通的应对方法是在发表论文时先尝试给比自己预期稍好一些的杂志投稿。2005年,物理学家乔治·希尔施(Jorge E. Hirsch)提出了用于评价物理学家个人研究能力的H指数。
“如果一个人以所有人都能明白的口气谈论问题,那不难得知这肯定是某种深奥的哲学(意即“反正不是科学”)。但是,我打算讲得更明确一些,我想让大家以一种更诚实而非模棱两可的方式理解我的意思。” ("A person talks in such generalities that everyone can understand him and it's considered to be some deep philosophy. However, I would like to be very rather more special and I would like to be understood in an honest way, rather than in a vague way.)
^"The historian ... requires a very broad definition of "science" – one that ... will help us to understand the modern scientific enterprise. We need to be broad and inclusive, rather than narrow and exclusive ... and we should expect that the farther back we go [in time] the broader we will need to be." — (Lindberg 2007,p.3), which further cites Pingree, David. Hellenophilia versus the History of Science. Isis. December 1992, 4 (4): 554–63. Bibcode:1992Isis...83..554P. JSTOR 234257. doi:10.1086/356288.
^"[Ibn al-Haytham] followed Ptolemy's bridge building ... into a grand synthesis of light and vision. Part of his effort consisted in devising ranges of experiments, of a kind probed before but now undertaken on larger scale."— Cohen 2010,第59页
^其译者Gerard of Cremona(英语:Gerard of Cremona)(约1114–1187)着迷于《至大论》,便来至Toledo,因为他知道在那里可以找到《至大论》的阿拉伯语文本。他在那里见到了所有种类的阿拉伯语书籍;他学习阿拉伯语,以将这些书籍译成拉丁文,因为他意识到“拉丁语文献之贫乏”。——引自Burnett, Charles. The Coherence of the Arabic-Latin Translation Program in Toledo in the Twelfth Century. Science in Context. 2002, 14: 249–88. doi:10.1017/S0269889701000096.
^Kepler, Johannes (1604) Ad Vitellionem paralipomena, quibus astronomiae pars opticae traditur (Supplements to Witelo, in which the optical part of astronomy is treated) as cited in Smith, A. Mark. What Is the History of Medieval Optics Really about?. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society. 1 January 2004, 148 (2): 180–94. JSTOR 1558283. PMID 15338543.
The full title translation is from p. 60 of James R. Voelkel (2001) Johannes Kepler and the New Astronomy Oxford University Press. 开普勒是在1600年7月10日于格拉茨观测了日偏食之后想到要做这个实验的。他使用第谷·布拉赫的观察手段,也就是把太阳的像通过一个针孔投影到一张纸上,而不是直接对着太阳看。他不同意布拉赫关于日全食不可能发生的结论,因为历史上有过日全食的记录;而是根据这次观测推论,孔的口径决定成像的锐度(孔越大,像越精确——这个事实如今对光学系统设计来说很基本)。Voelkel, p. 61, 注意到开普勒的实验第一次正确的描述了视觉和眼睛,因为开普勒意识到,若要对天文观测作精确的著述,就不能对眼睛置之不论。
^在司马迁(? – 前86年)的讲述了长达约2500年中国史的著作《史记》中,有中国第一位知名的水利工程师孙叔敖(fl. c. 630–595 BCE – 周朝)的记载,而据(李约瑟 et.al (1971) 《中国科学技术史》 4.3 p. 271),孙所修建的一个水库一直留存至今。
^Rochberg, Francesca. Ch.1 Natural Knowledge in Ancient Mesopotamia. (编) Shank, Michael; Numbers, Ronald; Harrison, Peter. Wrestling with Nature : From Omens to Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 2011: 9. ISBN 978-0226317830.
^R D. Biggs. Medicine, Surgery, and Public Health in Ancient Mesopotamia. Journal of Assyrian Academic Studies. 2005, 19 (1): 7–18.
^Lehoux, Daryn. 2. Natural Knowledge in the Classical World. (编) Shank, Michael; Numbers, Ronald; Harrison, Peter. Wrestling with Nature : From Omens to Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 2011: 39. ISBN 978-0226317830.
^"Progress or Return" in An Introduction to Political Philosophy: Ten Essays by Leo Strauss (Expanded version of Political Philosophy: Six Essays by Leo Strauss, 1975.) Ed. Hilail Gilden. Detroit: Wayne State UP, 1989.
^Cropsey; Strauss (编). History of Political Philosophy 3rd. : 209.
^Smith, A. Mark, What is the History of Medieval Optics Really About?, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, June 2004, 148 (2): 180–94, JSTOR 1558283, PMID 15338543
^Lindberg, David. (1992) The Beginnings of Western Science. University of Chicago Press. p. 162.
^Wildberg, Christian. Zalta, Edward N., 编. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. May 1, 2018 –通过Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
^ 41.041.1Grant, Edward. Islam and the eastward shift of Aristotelian natural philosophy. A History of Natural Philosophy: From the Ancient World to the Nineteenth Century. Cambridge University Press. 2007: 62–67. ISBN 978-0-521-68957-1.
^The Cambridge history of Iran. Fisher, W.B. (William Bayne). Cambridge: University Press. 1968–1991. ISBN 978-0521200936. OCLC 745412.
^Klein-Frank, F. Al-Kindi. In Leaman, O & Nasr, H (2001). History of Islamic Philosophy. London: Routledge. p. 165. Felix Klein-Frank (2001) Al-Kindi, pp. 166–67. In Oliver Leaman & Hossein Nasr. History of Islamic Philosophy. London: Routledge.
^Science in Islam. Oxford Dictionary of the Middle Ages. 2009.
^Toomer, G.J. Reviewed work: Ibn al-Haythams Weg zur Physik, Matthias Schramm. Isis. 1964, 55 (4): 463–65. JSTOR 228328. See p. 464: "Schramm sums up [Ibn Al-Haytham's] achievement in the development of scientific method.", p. 465: "Schramm has demonstrated .. beyond any dispute that Ibn al-Haytham is a major figure in the Islamic scientific tradition, particularly in the creation of experimental techniques." p. 465: "only when the influence of ibn al-Haytam and others on the mainstream of later medieval physical writings has been seriously investigated can Schramm's claim that ibn al-Haytam was the true founder of modern physics be evaluated."
^Smith, A. Mark. Alhacen's Theory of Visual Perception: A Critical Edition, with English Translation and Commentary, of the First Three Books of Alhacen's "De aspectibus", the Medieval Latin Version of Ibn al-Haytham's "Kitāb al-Manāẓir": Volume One. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society. 2001, 91 (4): i–337. JSTOR 3657358.
^Goldstein, Bernard R. Copernicus and the Origin of his Heliocentric System. Journal for the History of Astronomy. 2016, 33 (3): 219–35. doi:10.1177/002182860203300301.
^Cohen, Floris. How modern science came into the world. Four civilizations, one 17th-century breakthrough Second. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. 2010. ISBN 9789089642394.
^van Helden, Al. Pope Urban VIII. The Galileo Project. 1995 [November 3, 2016]. (原始内容存档于November 11, 2016).
^Cassels, Alan. Ideology and international relations in the modern world. 1st edition. Routledge. November 17, 1996. ISBN 978-0415119276(英语).使用|accessdate=需要含有|url= (帮助) 引文格式1维护:冗余文本 (link)
^Lightman, Bernard. 13. Science and the Public. (编) Shank, Michael; Numbers, Ronald; Harrison, Peter. Wrestling with Nature : From Omens to Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 2011: 367. ISBN 978-0226317830.
^Ross, Sydney. Scientist: The story of a word. Annals of Science(英语:Annals of Science). 1962, 18 (2): 65–85. doi:10.1080/00033796200202722.使用|accessdate=需要含有|url= (帮助) 确切说来,Whewell于1834年提到创造“科学家”这个词的人时只说那是“一位聪明的绅士”。Ross加了一条注释,说这个“某聪明的绅士”就是Whewell自己,但未给出此断言的理由。Ross 1962, p. 72.
^von Bertalanffy, Ludwig. The History and Status of General Systems Theory. The Academy of Management Journal. 1972, 15 (4): 407–26. JSTOR 255139. doi:10.2307/255139.
^Rashid, S. Tamir; Alexander, Graeme J.M. Induced pluripotent stem cells: from Nobel Prizes to clinical applications. Journal of Hepatology. March 2013, 58 (3): 625–629. ISSN 1600-0641. PMID 23131523. doi:10.1016/j.jhep.2012.10.026.
^C.S. Peirce (July 1879) "Note on the Progress of Experiments for Comparing a Wave-length with a Metre" American Journal of Science, as referenced by Crease 2011,第203页
^di Francia 1976,第13页: "The amazing point is that for the first time since the discovery of mathematics, a method has been introduced, the results of which have an intersubjective value!" (Author's punctuation)
^di Francia 1976,第4–5页: "One learns in a laboratory; one learns how to make experiments only by experimenting, and one learns how to work with his hands only by using them. The first and fundamental form of experimentation in physics is to teach young people to work with their hands. Then they should be taken into a laboratory and and taught to work with measuring instruments — each student carrying out real experiments in physics. This form of teaching is indispensable and cannot be read in a book."
^Fara 2009,第204页: "Whatever their discipline, scientists claimed to share a common scientific method that ... distinguished them from non-scientists."
^理查·费曼. The Feynman Lectures on Physics [费曼物理学讲义] 卷1. 艾迪生韦斯利. 1999. ISBN 978-0201021165. And the usual way of dealing with quantum mechanics makes that subject almost unavailable for the great majority of students because they have to take so long to learn it. Yet, in its real applications—especially in its more complex applications, such as in electrical engineering and chemistry—the full machinery of the differential equation approach is not actually used.
^原文为“This is the key of modern science and is the beginning of the true understanding of nature. This idea. That to look at the things, to record the details, and to hope that in the information thus obtained, may lie a clue to one or another of a possible theoretical interpretation...The next question was — what makes planets go around the sun? At the time of Kepler some people answered this problem by saying that there were angels behind them beating their wings and pushing the planets around an orbit. As you will see, the answer is not very far from the truth. The only difference is that the angels sit in a different direction and their wings push inward.”具体出处详见其英文维基语录。
^原话为“It can scarcely be denied that the supreme goal of all theory is to make the irreducible basic elements as simple and as few as possible without having to surrender the adequate representation of a single datum of experience.”常简作“Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler.”具体出处详见其英文维基语录。
^Subramanyam, Krishna; Subramanyam, Bhadriraju. Scientific and Technical Information Resources. CRC Press. 1981. ISBN 0-8247-8297-6. OCLC 232950234.
^Fred Barbash. Major publisher retracts 43 scientific papers amid wider fake peer-review scandal. 华盛顿邮报. 2015年3月27日 [2016年1月6日]. (原始内容存档于2015-12-30). But Jigisha Patel, associate editorial director for research integrity at BioMed Central, said it’s not 'a China problem. We get a lot of robust research of China. We see this as a broader problem of how scientists are judged.'
^原文为“I do not believe that science can disprove the existence of God; I think that is impossible. And if it is impossible, is not a belief in science and in a God – an ordinary God of religion — a consistent possibility? Yes, it is consistent. Despite the fact that I said that more than half of the scientists don't believe in God, many scientists do believe in both science and God, in a perfectly consistent way. But this consistency, although possible, is not easy to attain...”摘自费曼《科学与宗教的关系》
^原文为“I would like to remark, in passing, since the word "atheism" is so closely connected with "communism," that the communist views are the antithesis of the scientific, in the sense that in communism the answers are given to all the questions – political questions as well as moral ones – without discussion and without doubt. The scientific viewpoint is the exact opposite of this; that is, all questions must be doubted and discussed; we must argue everything out – observe things, check them, and so change them. The democratic government is much closer to this idea, because there is discussion and a chance of modification. One doesn't launch the ship in a definite direction. It is true that if you have a tyranny of ideas, so that you know exactly what has to be true, you act very decisively, and it looks good – for a while. But soon the ship is heading in the wrong direction, and no one can modify the direction any more. So the uncertainties of life in a democracy are, I think, much more consistent with science.”摘自费曼《科学与宗教的关系》
Crease, Robert P. World in the Balance: the historic quest for an absolute system of measurement. New York: W.W. Norton. 2011: 317. ISBN 978-0-393-07298-3.
di Francia, Giuliano Toraldo. The Investigation of the Physical World. Originally published in Italian as L'Indagine del Mondo Fisico by Giulio Einaudi editore 1976; first published in English by Cambridge University Press 1981. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1976. ISBN 978-0-521-29925-1.
Fara, Patricia. Science : a four thousand year history. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2009: 408. ISBN 978-0-19-922689-4.
Lindberg, D.C. Theories of Vision from al-Kindi to Kepler. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1976.
Lindberg, David C. The beginnings of Western science: the European Scientific tradition in philosophical, religious, and institutional context Second. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press. 2007. ISBN 978-0-226-48205-7.
Parkin, D. Simultaneity and Sequencing in the Oracular Speech of Kenyan Diviners. (编) Philip M. Peek. African Divination Systems: Ways of Knowing. Indianapolis, IN: Indiana University Press. 1991..
Smith, A. Mark. Alhacen's Theory of Visual Perception: A Critical Edition, with English Translation and Commentary, of the First Three Books of Alhacen's "De aspectibus", the Medieval Latin Version of Ibn al-Haytham's "Kitāb al-Manāẓir": Volume One. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society. 2001, 91 (4): i–337. JSTOR 3657358.
Smith, A. Mark. Alhacen's Theory of Visual Perception: A Critical Edition, with English Translation and Commentary, of the First Three Books of Alhacen's "De aspectibus", the Medieval Latin Version of Ibn al-Haytham's "Kitāb al-Manāẓir": Volume Two. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society. 2001, 91 (5): 339–819. JSTOR 3657357.
Stanovich, Keith E. How to Think Straight About Psychology. Boston: Pearson Education. 2007. ISBN 978-0-205-68590-5.
Ziman, John. Reliable knowledge: An exploration of the grounds for belief in science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1978. ISBN 978-0-521-22087-3.
Augros, Robert M.; Stanciu, George N. The new story of science : mind and the universe. Lake Bluff, Ill.: Regnery Gateway. 1984. ISBN 978-0-89526-833-4.
Becker, Ernest. The structure of evil; an essay on the unification of the science of man. New York: G. Braziller. 1968.
Burguete, Maria, and Lam, Lui, eds.(2014). All About Science: Philosophy, History, Sociology & Communication. World Scientific: Singapore. ISBN978-981-4472-92-0
Cole, K. C., Things your teacher never told you about science: Nine shocking revelationsNewsday, 長島, 纽约, March 23, 1986, pp. 21+
Crease, Robert P. World in the Balance: the historic quest for an absolute system of measurement. New York: W.W. Norton. 2011: 317. ISBN 978-0-393-07298-3.
Feyerabend, Paul (2005). Science, history of the philosophy of., as cited in Honderich, Ted. The Oxford companion to philosophy. Oxford 牛津郡: Oxford University Press. 2005. ISBN 978-0-19-926479-7. OCLC 173262485.
Feynman, Richard P. Robbins, Jeffrey, 编. The Pleasure of Finding Things Out: The Best Short Works of Richard P. Feynman [发现的快乐]. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Perseus Books Group. 1999. ISBN 978-0-465-02395-0. OCLC 181597764.
Gaukroger, Stephen. The Emergence of a Scientific Culture: Science and the Shaping of Modernity 1210–1685. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2006. ISBN 978-0-19-929644-6.
Thurs, Daniel Patrick. Science Talk: Changing Notions of Science in American Popular Culture. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. 2007: 22–52. ISBN 978-0-8135-4073-3.