Attractive and Repulsive Paradigms

Zenpundit links to a fascinating map of scientific paradigms, courtesy of SEED Magazine. Some of the visualization is as expected: brain research and central nervous system research, for instance, have a lot to do with each other:

“Larger paradigms have more papers; node proximity and darker links indicate how many papers are shared between two paradigms. Flowing labels list common words unique to each paradigm, large labels general areas of scientific inquiry.”

But a broader view reveals a “donut hole” scientific enterprise: Far from the consilience hoped for by some, scientific research programs are as repulsive as they are attractive: there is no central science that ties the various fields together.

Repulsive Science

Depressingly, for example, social science has wandered far from her mother, Biology. While individual researches (say, Alford, Funk & Hibbing or Galor & Moav) attempt to unite these fields, such a conscilience is far from us now.

Not One Field Yet

I’ve written far less impressive things on this link. For my studies, I wrote on the educational implications of biology, as well as a nifty book review and some original research. And just for this blog, I discussed the interaction between politics and gender for my series on Christianity.