The Science of Science

THE SCIENCE OF SCIENCE ELWOOD V. JENSEN* In Chicago, one peaceful morning in February, our deliberations concerning estrogen receptors were interrupted by the ringing of the telephone . The caller, Dr. Martin Friedrichs, announced in all honesty that hewas trying to findaphilosopher. Now, this indeed wasa novelsituation. In the olden days, you will recall, the philosopher, lantern in hand, went about seeking an honest man; here was an honest man searching for a philosopher. "You have come to the right place," I told him, looking around for my Stein der Weisen. "I am a Doctor ofPhilosophy. What can I do for you? "How would you like to go to Berlin?" he asked, the name Berlin bringing to mind such great philosophers as Hegel, Fichte,John le Carré, and Len Deighton. "Fine," I said. "When do we leave?" "Whenever you like," he replied, assuming a manner similar to that with which Mephistopheles beguiled Dr. Faustus. "But, first we must make a small bargain. In Berlin some scientists will assemble to discuss the biodynamics of hormones. All you have to do is give them a little philosophical lecture on the science ofscience." At first this appeared harmless. We all believe that science is a good thing; therefore the science of science should be even better—by one order of magnitude. But on further consideration, I began to have misgivings , especially when Dr. Friedrichs revealed the names of some of those who would be in attendance. These were all distinguished investi- * Ben May Laboratory for Cancer Research, University of Chicago, 950 E. 59th Street. This paper was presented at the 2d Schering Symposium, "Biodynamics and Mechanism of Action of Steroid Hormones," Berlin, March, 1968, and is reproduced with permission from the Proceedings ofthat Symposium, G. Raspé, ed. (Pergamon Press—F. Vieweg und Sohn, Braunschweig. Oxford, New York, 1968). I am grateful toJohanna Darden for drawing Figure 2, to Dr. Ralph Jones, Jr., for Figure 3 and for the information about chloroquine and primaquine, and to Dr. Verne D. Hospelhorn for Figure 5. 274 Elwood V.Jensen · Science ofScience Perspectives in Biology and Medicine · Winter 1969 gators whose business was science. How could anyone, except perhaps the Students for a Democratic Society, presume to tell such experts how to run their business? Discretion suggested that one should heed the admonition ofLyndon Johnson and not travel outside the Western hemisphere . But thoughts ofthe Kurfürstendamm, Charlottenburg, and Weisse mit Schuss proved stronger than the voice ofreason. So here I am in my assigned capacity to discuss with you "Die Wissenschaft der Wissenschaft ." Sometimes I feel that a more appropriate title might be "Funeral in Berlin." Science, Research, and Philosophy Before undertaking any philosophical appraisal of science, one might consider what we mean by science, research, and philosophy. Let us define "science" (from scire, "to know") as systematized knowledge formulated with regard to the discovery of general truths and the operation ofgeneral laws, "research" as critical inquiry seeking new facts or principles which extend or modify science, and "philosophy" (literally, "love of wisdom") as a rational study ofthe basic principles ofa particular branch ofknowledge. According to Ingle [i], the general aims of science are to understand natural phenomena and to predict and control them. Progress in science depends on research. In our discussion today, which I hope will be rational and thereby philosophical, I would like to consider with you some of the factors which influence the nature and significance of research in the biological sciences. The Templatefor Research The research accomplishments of any scientist or group of scientists might bej'udged by their productivity or total output, by their efficiency or output in relation to the effort and expense invested, and by the originality and significance oftheir discoveries in opening new areas ofknowledge . Success in research is subject to influence by a variety of factors, some of which originate with the investigator himself and thus may be called intrinsic, and others which depend on his environment and which we shall term extrinsic. Intrinsic factors include the scientist's motivation, his background and training, his choice of a problem, his approach to the problem, and his adherence to sound research principles. Some extrinsic considerations are the facilities...