Biology-Online • View topic - “Fathers” and “Sons” of theories in cell physiology
Login

Join for Free!
122622 members
Advertisement
Advertisement

“Fathers” and “Sons” of theories in cell physiology

For discussing the functions of different structures of all organisms.

Moderator: BioTeam

“Fathers” and “Sons” of theories in cell physiology

Postby Vladimir Matveev » Sat Sep 23, 2017 11:16 am

"Fathers” and “sons” of theories in cell physiology: the membrane theory (multimedia article, 20 min):
https://youtu.be/V4rauBfjh1s

Full text: http://www.bioparadigma.spb.ru/files/Ma ... 'sons'.pdf

Abstract.
The last 50 years in the history of life sciences are remarkable for a new important feature that looks as a great threat for their future. A profound specialization dominating in quickly developing fields of science causes a crisis of the scientific method. The essence of the method is a unity of two elements, the experimental data and the theory that explains them. To us, "fathers" of science, classically, were the creators of new ideas and theories. They were the true experts of their own theories. It is only they who have the right to say: "I am the theory". In other words, they were carriers of theories, of the theoretical knowledge. The fathers provided the necessary logical integrity to their theories since theories in biology have still to be based on strict mathematical proofs. It is not true for sons. As a result of massive specialization, modern experts operate in very confined close spaces. They formulate particular rules far from the level of theory. The main theories of science are known to them only at the textbook level. Nowadays, nobody can say: "I am the theory". With whom, then is it possible to discuss today on a broader theoretical level? How can a classical theory - for example, the membrane one - be changed or even disproved under these conditions? How can the "sons" with their narrow education catch sight of membrane theory defects? As a result, "global" theories have few critics and control. Due to specialization, we have lost the ability to work at the experimental level of biology within the correct or appropriate theoretical context. The scientific method in its classic form is now being rapidly eroded. A good case can be made for "Membrane Theory", to which we will largely refer throughout this article.
User avatar
Vladimir Matveev
Garter
Garter
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 11:50 am
Location: St.Petersburg, Russia

Re: “Fathers” and “Sons” of theories in cell physiology

Postby claudepa » Sun Sep 24, 2017 10:19 am

I am a retired biology researcher and I believe that the most important is in the experiment itself. Then theory is useful to interpret the results of the experiment. When I began research one of my bosses believed that the only interesting experiments were first designed in the brain of the researcher. I do not agree. The most interesting results I obtained were serenpiditous results at the bench.
Unfortunately less famous than the discovery of penicilin by Fleming. But the principle is the same. Experimental results are generally not exactly what is expected and then good researchers are able to make new observations and this is often the most interesting because biology is so complex that no human brain is able to know everything. When I obtained my unexpected results I had talks with the most prestigious researchers of the time in this field. No one was able to give the good explanation. I got it only years later thanks to new results at the bench. This is at least my personnal experience.
claudepa
Death Adder
Death Adder
 
Posts: 81
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2015 12:43 pm

Postby Vladimir Matveev » Mon Sep 25, 2017 4:44 am

One day I talked with a professor at Nanking University (China). He complained that his students/graduate students are not able to write a term paper/article. They are unable to give the text a logical integrity. I suggested that this decline in logical thinking is a consequence of the widespread use of SMS (mobile). If a student wrote for his life so many SMS, how many alphabetical characters in the British Encyclopedia, he forever lost the ability to write a logical text length of 5-10 sentences. For the professor, this assumption was unexpected, but he quickly agreed with me. This is called "clip thinking" or "patchwork" thinking. Unfortunately, specialization begins at the university. If a student is taught several years of just recycling the waste, then it castrates his intellect for life. The combination of clip thinking with special education leads us to the clipocalypse of science: clip thinking student, clip thinking professor, clip thinking scientist, clip thinking Nobel Prize Winner, clip thinking president.
About clip thinking: https://jyx.jyu.fi/dspace/bitstream/han ... 081018.pdf
User avatar
Vladimir Matveev
Garter
Garter
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 11:50 am
Location: St.Petersburg, Russia


Re: “Fathers” and “Sons” of theories in cell physiology

Postby claudepa » Tue Sep 26, 2017 1:55 pm

I agree that many of my students had difficulties writing an article. But this was already before the SMS time. My feeling was that the best students do not go into science because it is not enough rewarding. A lot of work for low salaries. And also when you are in a non English speaking country it is even more difficult because the article has to be written in English.
claudepa
Death Adder
Death Adder
 
Posts: 81
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2015 12:43 pm


Return to Physiology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron