A case for tolerance in marine ecology: let us not put out the baby with the bathwater*
A case for tolerance in marine ecology: let us not put out the baby with the bathwater*
复制标题
海洋生态宽容的案例：我们不能把婴儿和洗澡水一起倒掉*
DOI：
10.3989/scimar.2001.65s2283
复制
发表时间：
2001
期刊：
影响因子：
1.4
通讯作者：
J. Gili
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
W. Arntz;J. Gili
在从事海洋生态研究并在大学讲学数十年之后，作者们意识到，他们在学生时代或之前几十年建立的概念和范式，几乎没有一个能原封不动地保存至今。考虑到海洋科学由于改进的方法、扩大的研究范围（例如进入深海和极地地区）、研究人员数量和资金的增加以及科学成果的大大改善和加速交流而取得的巨大进步，这似乎是很自然的。然而，在这种背景下，令人震惊的是，我们的许多专业协会（不仅是缺乏经验的年轻人）以近乎救世主的热情呼吁立即“废除”或“解雇”旧思想，因为它们的创造者在思考方式上是错误的。在这些作者看来，关于生态概念在科学论证中的作用存在一个基本的误解。很少有概念愚蠢到可以完全抛弃而不受任何损失；其中绝大多数包含一些真理，这些真理至少适用于某些情况，因此可以作为构建生态理论的基石。本文将尝试在这一点上作进一步阐述。更重要的是：许多现在被认为是（部分？）错误的概念极大地刺激了科学讨论，在某些情况下直到今天，它们的存在保证了生态学工作在各自领域继续下去的必要性。最后，观察到这些天在一些学科中取得的生态进步的巨大步伐，同时，尽管我们做出了所有努力，但在其他学科中我们仍然面临着不确定性的程度，不难预测，现在许多取代旧概念的新思想很快也会被扔进科学史的垃圾堆。所以宽容应该是我们的座右铭：让我们不要把婴儿和洗澡水一起浇灭！对旧的概念给予信任，热切地寻找替代方案，并努力为你的结果提供最好的证据，但要谦虚。一个生态问题可能有多种解决方案，处理这种情况的方法是分化，而不是废除。
After working in marine ecological research and lecturing at universities for several decades, the authors are aware that almost none of the concepts and paradigms established at the time they were students or in the decades before have survived unchanged up to the present day. This appears quite natural taking into account the enormous progress made by marine science due to refined methods, extended range of research e.g. into the deep sea and the polar regions, increased number of researchers and funding, and greatly improved and accelerated exchange of scientific results. What is striking, however, against this background is the almost messianic fervour with which many of our professional guild (and not only the younger ones lacking experience) call for the immediate “abolishment” or “dismissal” of old ideas because their creators were wrong in thinking the way they did. In these authors` opinion, there is a basic misunderstandig about the role of ecological concepts in scientific argumentation. Very few concepts are so foolish that they can be dismissed entirely without any loss; the vast majority contain some truth that may fit at least certain situations, and may thus serve as a brickstone in constructing ecological theory. An attempt will be made to expand on that point in this contribution. What is more important: many of the concepts nowadays considered (partially?) erroneous have stimulated scientific discussion enormously, in some cases up to the present day and have, by their mere existence, guaranteed that ecological work was found necessary to continue in the respective fields. Finally, observing the tremendous pace at which ecological progress is being made these days in some disciplines and at the same time, the degree of uncertainty we are - despite all efforts - still facing in others, it is not difficult to anticipate that many of the new ideas replacing the old concepts nowadays will end up shortly on the garbage dump of science history as well. So tolerance should be the motto: let us not put out the baby with the bathwater! Give the old concepts their credit, look eagerly for alternatives and try to provide the best possible evidence for your results, but be modest. There may be various solutions to one ecological problem, and the way to handle this situation is differentiation, not abolishment.