2
$\begingroup$

What is the proportion of biologists... was closed by @Remi.b (gold tag close hammer) as a duplicate. There was some discussion in the comments about whether the question should have been closed.

$\endgroup$
3
$\begingroup$

I appreciate the question closure, because I think it should be closed, though I would vote to close as off topic rather than a duplicate. Since it is closed, and should be closed (in my opinion), I would not reopen it.

Our on topic help article lists three bullets:

  • general questions about biological concepts
  • questions about the biological mechanisms behind medical conditions
  • questions about techniques in a biological or biochemical laboratory

This is clearly not a question about a medical condition or a technique. I do not believe it is a general question about a biological concept. It is a question about who believes a biological concept to be a fact and who doesn't. The answer would not opinion based, though it is about an opinion, because one could reasonably determine the answer with appropriate survey methods. But I don't think it fits the scope of this site to address questions about who believes a biological concept to be a fact, and ask for a list of people that don't. Beyond the problem about it asking for an estimate of biologists beliefs (a survey question), I'm not sure how you separate the answer from the underlying question about the philosophy of science, which is explicitly off topic. I can see an argument for the other side though, so I thought I'd bring it up for discussion.

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ Well this is a more plausible reason for closure than saying that it is 'duplicate' and referring to an article that it actually doesn't duplicate?! But I also asked about alternative models to evolution that had been put forth by reputable biologists, and I received no answer, I think this is related to biology, isn't it. The only answer I got is None. which I cannot believe. $\endgroup$ Mar 4 '19 at 14:19
  • $\begingroup$ @ZuhairAl-Johar if you were to ask a primary question about the alternative models to evolution, it would be closed as a duplicate of this. You might get a better answer to that question on the HSM.SE. I would take the tour there, look at the help page for what is on topic, and run a search for similar questions first, though. I noticed that you still haven't taken the tour for biology, btw. I would encourage you to do that. $\endgroup$
    – De Novo
    Mar 4 '19 at 15:30
  • $\begingroup$ @ZuhairAl-Johar also, you should feel free to post an answer to this meta question, summarizing why you believe the question should be reopened. $\endgroup$
    – De Novo
    Mar 4 '19 at 15:32
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I don't think there is a need for it, really, as you said it should be closed as off-topic, you are right regarding that. But the cause for closure should be changed to be far, or at least the link put in the reason for duplication should be change to a correct one. $\endgroup$ Mar 5 '19 at 11:27
3
$\begingroup$

A question about the proportion of biologists who believe something does not

“Focus on questions about an actual problem you have faced”

and, in any case, is off-topic as subjective unless someone has conducted a statistically valid opinion poll.

In which case, ‘opinion poll’ says it all. In science we are interested in evidence for ideas, not in what people ‘believe’. That direction leads to the abyss.

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .