When you think of science, what comes to mind?

On science, practice, and scientific thinking.

So, when you think of science, what comes to mind?

Whatever your attention is directed toward, whether that be the cosmos, the periodic table, or Einstein’s famous equation of E = mc2, I hope the following words broaden your perspective.

Some think that science only exists within the four walls of a lab, imagining a space occupied by lab dwellers conducting research in their white lab coats and safety glasses.

Under this impression, stepping foot outside of the lab would land you in the ‘real-world’, which is analogous to what is commonly known as ‘practice’.

I would classify this a narrow view of science that creates the perceived ‘gap’ between science and practice.

From my perspective, however, science extends far beyond the four walls of a lab and isn’t completely synonymous with the research that takes place within it.

When I think about science, I think about possessing respect for evidence that supports and opposes my beliefs, weighing evidence and critically analysing experimental strengths and limitations, and the scientific method that fosters curious questions and generates hypotheses followed by rational but provisional conclusions.

I also think science stands for intellectual humility and embracing uncertainty and healthy disagreement; traits that should shine through a scientific message that is open-minded, non-absolute, and non-authoritative.

With these scientific traits in mind, I think an equal amount of weight should be given to the way a scientific message is conveyed and to its contents. Indeed, the cornerstone feature of a sound scientific message is reasoning not to win, but to find out.

What I am describing here is a framework of thinking – which we can call scientific thinking - that informs the contents of a message and the way said message is conveyed.

Indeed, I think an equal amount of weight should be given to the way a scientific message is conveyed and to its contents, as another cornerstone feature of science is reasoning not to win, but to find out.

Scientific thinking can be the bridge to the gap between science and practice. From this perceptive, science lives on, even when one steps foot outside the lab door.

Understanding that science isn’t barricaded by the four walls of a lab highlights for example that is possible for one to tout research findings, whilst being unscientific in their approach.

To be scientific is to apply a framework of thinking that is first and foremost grounded in the aforementioned traits of science, whilst 1) considering research an important feature of consideration in scientific reasoning, and 2) acknowledging the bounds of research and the importance of practical implications.

This is how science and practice can be successfully integrated.

Hopefully it is now clear that through scientific thinking, science can be a part of your life whether you spend time reading and conducting research or not. As Einstein once said: “Science is nothing but the refinement of everyday thinking”

I hope this post has broadened your perspective of science. In my coming posts, I will discuss ways to formulate a scientific framework of thinking, considerations to improve your understanding of research interpretation, and the importance of sound scientific communication.