Monday, September 18, 2006

Replanning and science

In my last set of updates, I found myself in a trap very similar to one I have fallen into before; spending too much time in some sections and not enough in others. I decided to, once again, modify my approach. This time, it is working in a much better and more satisfying way.

Although I would like to base everything else on physical and natural science, this doesn't work well because it depends too heavily on other areas. Physics, for example, depends too heavily on mathematics. Chemistry is not nearly as well organized as I would like. There is too little information in Astronomy, compared to the other sciences, and it is not generally as useful as I would like. The areas where significant progress is possible are Earth Science and Biology. I haven't quite caught up to where I was recently in putting these sections in place, so I've been considering the connections to the science aids.
Personal studies will be valuable to science, but so far, the human body and psychology aren't well enough developed to be useful. I've been making rather more progress in biography. Many of the individuals listed in Hart's list of the 100 most influential are scientists, and analysis of these biographies is bound to reveal something.
Anthropology has been badly under-considered in my previous attempts. Most areas of this subject are again too undeveloped to be useful, but I have been working with human geography, and placing individual scientists in a geographic context has some benefit. European geography is particularly useful.
Culture has also been under-considered. Areas of conceptual culture such as scientific language, literature, graphics, mathematics, and philosophy should have a fairly prominent place in studies of science. Material culture, or tools and artifacts, and behavioral culture, such as customs and occupations, aren't quite well enough developed in this version to be very useful in science.
Institutions have also been under-considered. Areas of families, education, economics, government, and religion will all be useful to science when they are better developed.
Sociology has been considered fairly prominently. I don't have enough detail on particular cities to consider their respective influences on science, but peoples are far more significant. By far the greatest majority of work has been performed in Western civilization.
I have little to add at present to the history of science, except a connection to the late 20th century, which includes the last 25 years or so. There isn't much real detail in this period yet, but it should develop in time.

No comments: