Which do you prefer physics, biology, or chemistry

[Ballerina]

Absolutely it is the antithesis, as we're discussing what defines a science. One point in the criteria would be that the field uses premises before publishing conclusions ('sciency'). Although I will admit to being a bit catty n____n Biology absofruitly can be as objective and rigorous as chemistry or physics, especially with its solid foundation in empiricism. Physics unfortunately treads into the domain of pure theory one too many times. And while biology is somewhat less quantitative, I think we seek a kind of child-like refuge in numbers for the truth. Stephen Gould and Darrell Huff would agree that you can manipulate math, from vector calculus to epidemiology, to say almost anything you want.

As a neuroscience major, I'm not even touching the dilemma of whether psychology is a science. That war was unfortunately over before it began DDDD':

[vox nihili]

Absolutely it is the antithesis, as we're discussing what defines a science. One point in the criteria would be that the field uses premises before publishing conclusions ('sciency'). Although I will admit to being a bit catty n____n Biology absofruitly can be as objective and rigorous as chemistry or physics, especially with its solid foundation in empiricism. Physics unfortunately treads into the domain of pure theory one too many times. And while biology is somewhat less quantitative, I think we seek a kind of child-like refuge in numbers for the truth. Stephen Gould and Darrell Huff would agree that you can manipulate math, from vector calculus to epidemiology, to say almost anything you want.

As a neuroscience major, I'm not even touching the dilemma of whether psychology is a science. That war was unfortunately over before it began DDDD':

That's a true point, that said, I'm not exactly conducting science in this debate, so that I haven't predefined sciency is fine hahah (science loves technicalities too). I really don't think that accusing a science of not being as rigorous or subscribing to empiricism as well is the antithesis of the scientific spirit. In fact, being critical of method is the scientific spirit.

In very broad strokes, the reason I think that physics is the most sciency, and by sciency I mean the area of science that gives us a model to follow (it's rigorous, only concerns itself with data), is that there is a tendency in physics to go against the most solid realities because the data says so. Admittedly, in Biology and Chemistry there isn't as much of a chance to do so. It's hard to explain to be honest, it's more of a feeling.

I guess the other thing that fuels it is how physics is funded. A hell of a lot of the funding for physics is about pursuing really grand things; like the structure and the nature of the universe. It's very hard for biology or chemistry to compete with that hahah.



On that debate, I find myself changing mind all the time. Studying the activity of the heart, the lungs, the digestive system, is all very scientific. It seems a little bit odd then that psychology, which concerns itself with the activities of the brain, is apparently somehow "unscientific". I'm pretty sure I've paid out psych already, but that was just being silly. As I'm sure you already know, researchers in psychology are some of the most critical about experimental methods, because they are so important in psych.

[Ballerina]

That's a true point, that said, I'm not exactly conducting science in this debate, so that I haven't predefined sciency is fine hahah (science loves technicalities too). I really don't think that accusing a science of not being as rigorous or subscribing to empiricism as well is the antithesis of the scientific spirit. In fact, being critical of method is the scientific spirit.

But I'm sure you'd want to remain consistent for PERSONAL INTEGRITY AND VALOR. EXCELSIOR, T-RAV. The antithesis is that you hadn't listed any reasons or validated your points, despite the burden of proof lying on your side.

In very broad strokes, the reason I think that physics is the most sciency, and by sciency I mean the area of science that gives us a model to follow (it's rigorous, only concerns itself with data), is that there is a tendency in physics to go against the most solid realities because the data says so. Admittedly, in Biology and Chemistry there isn't as much of a chance to do so. It's hard to explain to be honest, it's more of a feeling.

Citations. When does intuition come into play?

I guess the other thing that fuels it is how physics is funded. A hell of a lot of the funding for physics is about pursuing really grand things; like the structure and the nature of the universe. It's very hard for biology or chemistry to compete with that hahah.

That doesn't increase its validity, only its kickass value

On that debate, I find myself changing mind all the time. Studying the activity of the heart, the lungs, the digestive system, is all very scientific. It seems a little bit odd then that psychology, which concerns itself with the activities of the brain, is apparently somehow "unscientific". I'm pretty sure I've paid out psych already, but that was just being silly. As I'm sure you already know, researchers in psychology are some of the most critical about experimental methods, because they are so important in psych.

Hahaha yeah, I suppose it depends on the individual clinician/researcher. I've (hopefully) gained a type of self-awareness from psychology that was crucial in developing a more scientific and logical approach to life. But I've also sat through personality psychology lectures and felt I learnt more from my breadth track. MY BREADTH TRACK.

[hangeeb93]

I am doing the three sciences and generally I prefer Biology and then physics

[Raza.aquarius]

Chemistry coz it's the easiest

[shlblk]

I'm in Year 10 and have done all three and my opinions might change next year, but....
Physics<Biology<Chemistry
I'm not doing bio next year though...

[Reus]

I'm starting to like Biology over Chemistry right now! Physics was just the worst last year haha.

[NerdyPi]

I know this is a bit late, but I felt I had to add my opinion on this particular topic

physics > chem > bio

(basically the more maths in the subject, the more I enjoy it)

[geminii]

I'm doing two sciences - Bio 3/4 and Chem 1/2, and I DEFINITELY prefer Bio over Chem...chemistry is so hard...