Introduction » to 1900 » 1901 to 1953 » 1954 to 1975 » 1976 to 2008

This is a timeline of major events in the science of genomics: the science of DNA encoding and how genes work. This introduction is my personal statement about the importance of science history in science education and how we learn to do great science.

Introduction: Why History is Important in Science Education

History is the context from which modern scientific ideas have originated. Without an awareness of the progression of scientific thought, how can one expect to continue that progression?

These ideas were conceived and pursued by people like us, and they, like us, ultimately must have aspired to have been appreciated for their contributions to human understanding. We owe it to ourselves to honor them, and if we do not, how can we expect the future to honor us?

And after all, since I assume self-education motivates the reader, we need not bother ourselves with the “facts-only factory-floor efficiency” by which we indoctrinate our American public school children. Without context, there is fundamentally no empirical difference between a book on biology and a book on religion. History is the origin of that context. By history, we can learn the process by which ideas are explored and validated, specifically, explored and validated not by mythical heroes, but by people quite like us.

I think it’s time that the scientific community, rather than lamenting the encroachment of peasant-thought in our society, should instead assume responsibility and more aggressive cultural leadership. I understand that this type of education is far more resource-intensive and is likely less measurably effective for the majority of students. This is why I very strongly support separate gifted education even if, pragmatically, it may be at the expense educational objectives. However, the same ability that we reward in schools —the ability to superficially adopt beliefs by authoritative drilling— is far better exploited by a system of belief that promises “eternal happiness” rather than “eternal nerdliness.” That is cost of rote drilling in science education, and as demographics trends and American culture continue to deemphasize rigorous thought, we are merely equipping the minds of our children to be better susceptible to manipulation.

I’ve tried to note ongoing human and theoretical themes to show that science was not infallibly “transcribed” all at once by a single great figure, but over much time and collaborative effort by many dedicated, passionate, intelligent, yet flawed people —people like us.

My biggest regret is that this timeline does not reflect the vast, continuous efforts of all the many scientists, engineers, professors, supporting staff, and institutions which made the outstanding scientific achievements noted here possible. I would like to note, at least, that given the hundreds of thousands of years of human existence, given the nearly two millennia between Aristotle and the next few notable achievements in biology, in no way has the natural world changed such that many recent discoveries were not possible in the past.

The world didn’t change such that we could see it, we changed such that we could see the world. By that measure, a culture that can produce and appreciate science is far, far more important than the preservation of any collection of facts. So the history of science, like science itself, must not be the mere preservation of facts, but the theoretical framework by which to understand them.

We understand nature by science; we understand understanding by science history.

page 1 of 5 | next »
Return to Genomics Education Center