Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Where science has gone wrong

The current predicament of British science is but one consequence of a deep and widespread malaise. In response, scientists must reassert the pre-eminence of the concepts of objectivity and truth.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 1

    Medawar, P.B. Induction and Intuition in Scientific Thought 11 (Methuen, London, 1969).

    Google Scholar 

  2. 2

    Williams, S. The Times 15 (27 February 1971).

    Google Scholar 

  3. 3

    The Public Understanding of Science (The Royal Society, London, 1985).

  4. 4

    The Royal Society Corporate Plan: A Strategy for the Royal Society 1986–1996 (The Royal Society, London, 1986).

  5. 5

    Porter, G. Supplement to Royal Society News 3, i–vi (1986).

    Google Scholar 

  6. 6

    Alexander, P. et al. Analysis 46, 161 (1986).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7

    Lawson, H. The Listener 115, 12–13 (20 February 1986).

    Google Scholar 

  8. 8

    Popper, K.R. Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge 4th edn 33–37 (Routledge & Kegan Paul, London, 1972).

    Google Scholar 

  9. 9

    Popper, K.R. in Problems in the Philosophy of Science (eds Lakatos, I. & Musgrave, A.) 163–164 (North Holland, Amsterdam, 1968).

    Google Scholar 

  10. 10

    Lakatos, I. in The Problem of Inductive Logic (ed. Lakatos, I.) 397 (North Holland, Amsterdam, 1968).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. 11

    Stove, D.C. Popper and After: Four Modern Irrationalists 16 (Pergamon, Oxford, 1982).

    Google Scholar 

  12. 12

    Kuhn, T.S. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions 2nd edn (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1970).

    Google Scholar 

  13. 13

    Wade, N. Science 197, 143–145 (1977).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14

    Feyerabend, P. Against Method: Outline of an Anarchistic Theory of Knowledge 28 (New Left Books, London, 1975).

    Google Scholar 

  15. 15

    Broad, W.J. Science 206, 534–537 (1979).

    ADS  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16

    Ross, W.D. (ed.) The Works of Aristotle Volume VI Opuscula 979a 11-980b 21 (Clarendon, Oxford, 1913).

  17. 17

    Chalmers, A.F. What Is This Thing Called Science? An Assessment of the Nature and the Status of Science and its Methods 1st edn (University of Queensland Press, St Lucia, 1976); 2nd edn (Open University Press, Milton Keynes, 1982).

    Google Scholar 

  18. 18

    The Future of the Science Budget: The Government's Response to the Report from the Education, Science & Arts Committee Session 1984–1985 (Command 9849, HMSO, London, 1986).

  19. 19

    Sharp Cook, C. Am. J. Phys. 48, 175–176 (1980).

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20

    Psimopoulos, M. & Theocharis, T. Am. J. Phys. 54, 969 (1986).

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Theocharis, T., Psimopoulos, M. Where science has gone wrong. Nature 329, 595–598 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1038/329595a0

Download citation

Further reading

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing