Summary

The problems encountered in ecological research, and diYculties in solving them, have led to substantial criticisms of the subject, and particularly its methods. These criticisms, and some proposals for improvement, are discussed. Criticisms of general methods and objectives for a science are most frequently based on the critic's ideals. As science has developed to study new problems, particularly those not associated with the physical and chemical sciences, our understanding of what can be studied, and how best it can be done, have changed. Some criticisms of ecology are based on the ideals, for both objectives and methods, more suitable for the physical and chemical sciences.

Progressive Synthesis has two ideals. (1) Progress in ecology requires the development of theory for integrative concepts. This is an ideal for the subject of ecology, enabling construction of scientific explanations for questions about communities, ecosystems, and populations. (2) Progress in ecology requires dominance of the behavioral norms of science over the counternorms. This is an ideal for research methodology. The use of upward inference as a process of reasoning is made by discussion and debate and may not be resolved definitively by clear-cut measurement or experiment. This requires that social processes in research must proceed effectively and not be restricted or biased.

Introduction

Criticisms made of ecology have sometimes been acrimonious about its achievements, or perceived lack of them, and about its methods. Improved analysis or new, and hopefully improved, research can meet valid criticism of a particular investigation or research finding. But criticisms about general levels of achievement, or the methods used, are more fundamental and can not be responded to through additional research.