It might have been the 16th century philosopher Francis Bacon who coined the term "science", but even if it wasn't, the word must have come into common usage around his time, in the western world at least.
Perhaps with an eye on that, the Science Council has seen fit to spend a year working out a new definition of science. It may be, they claim, the first "official definition of science" ever published.
Here's what they've come up with:
"Science is the pursuit of knowledge and understanding of the natural and social world following a systematic methodology based on evidence."
Not bad for a year's work ... But why bother with a new definition? In a statement from the Council, chief exec Diana Garnham says:
"In an era where practices such as homeopathy are becoming widespread, and 'detox' is an acceptable aim for a diet, a definition creates a clear distinction between what is genuine science, and what is pseudoscience."
So there you go.
I ran the definition past a couple of experts to see what they made of it. David Edgerton, professor of the history of science and technology at Imperial College, made two points:
"It defines science as a pursuit, an activity, related to the creation of new knowledge, rather than established knowledge itself. Science is seen as a species of research. Yet a definition of science needs to define the nature of the knowledge not the means of its creation only."
and
"The definition would include historical research and indeed some journalism! It does not demarcate something called science from the humanities. This is a good and sensible thing. From the context of the press release this is not something the Science Council seem to have realised."
The philosopher AC Grayling thinks the Council has done a good job:
"Because 'science' denotes such a very wide range of activities a definition of it needs to be general; it certainly needs to cover investigation of the social as well as natural worlds; it needs the words "systematic" and "evidence"; and it needs to be simple and short. The definition succeeds in all these respects admirably, and I applaud it therefore."
The new definition has left me with two mildly nagging doubts, though. I wonder what it means for those who suggest that intelligent design or creationism are based on science? And who are the Science Council anyway?
