ABSTRACT
Science might be visualised as hierarchical knowledge of diverse aspects of the world. It could perhaps be represented as an inverted triangle. Near the (upturned) base, at the top, would be sciences such as zoology or botany, which in turn rest on principles of biology closer to the apex, lower still comes chemistry, finally physics at the apex. Much of physics depends on a few relatively simple classical laws, such as those touched on in chapters 1 and 2. However, this is not the very tip of the triangle. There lie particle physics and relativity, each describing and at least partially explaining the very small and very large scale structure of the universe respectively. Up until this century the tip of the triangle would have been the laws of classical physics. It is possible that in the next century the tip will be even sharper, ending (possibly) with something called ‘superstrings’, a new theory that may yet provide the ‘fundamental’ laws of the universe (Kaku 1994). Not all of the relationships are hierarchical, some like those between zoology and botany, or biology and geology, take the form of complex networks of theories. A (usually) implicit task of science is an explication not just of theoretical relationships within sciences, but also between phenomena known under the rubric of one science and phenomena known under the rubric of another. Indeed the overwhelming tendency in Western science is towards explaining the more complex in terms of the less complex.
