1. The origin of the word 'Science'

Morsel:

The word ‘Science’ comes from the Latin word ‘Scientia’ meaning ‘knowledge’.

Meal:

The word 'Science' has been around since the mid 1300s, originally coming from Old French science (“knowledge; learning”), which itself came from the Latin scientia (“knowledge; expertness”), which originated from the past participle stem scire from the Latin verb sciō (“to know”). This verb is believed to come from the PIE root skei- (“to cut, to split”). Initially its meanings pertained to the “the state or fact of knowing'” or “knowing or understanding acquired be study” but these meanings have become archaic.

OED also lists one meaning and a phrase regarding boxing which are now seldom used. The meaning is akin to “skilful technique”, for example:

“Bim was a light heavyweight, a rusher, a foul fighter, with little science, great strength and a brutish courage.”

The phrase is “to blind (a person) with science” which originally meant, in the context of boxing, “to overcome (an opponent) using greater skill” but this is now rare. It also has the current meaning of confounding someone with complex information. Both these meanings were incipiently Australian but the latter has spread since then.

'Science', as commonly used today, often refers to the study of natural phenomena, such as with biology and physics. This was originally called 'natural philosophy', a much older term. As 'science' began to replace 'philosophy' in the 1800s there was a period of about 50 years of them being essentially synonymous. 'Science' grew a greater hold in English, perhaps thanks to “French usage [which] favoured the allocation of philosophy to the theological and metaphysical, and science to the experimental and physical branches of knowledge.”

Eventually most terms migrated to using a form of 'science'. For example, instruments of scientific inquiry, such as the telescope and air pump, became increasingly important in the 1600s and were distinguished from other instruments, such as for musical purposes. These were referred to as initially 'philosophical' (or 'mathematical or 'optical', etc.) apparatus, the term 'scientific' not being adopted until around the 1850s.

The word for a person who does science, a 'scientist', came around the same time. In the 1830s there were questions what to call men of science. The term '(natural) philosopher' was considered too broad and perhaps increasingly inappropriate or confusing. Previous terms that were used were 'sciencer' (1547), 'scientiate' (1647), 'scientman' (1661), and 'sciencist' (1778). In 1834 Wiliiam Whewell proposed some new terms under the guise if anonymity. 'Savant' was one he suggested but it was considered too presumptuous and French (he was British). 'Scientist' was the other, coined through analogy with 'artist', but was made jocularly. He put forward it again in 1840 more seriously. It was dismissed with disdain by the leading scientists of the age but grew initial traction in America. After early disgust of this “needless Americanism”, it marched into everyday prominence in Britain, and then the rest of the English-speaking world.

Personal Cheese:

The Latin meaning of this word succinctly summarises the quest of this blog. For ten years I collected a little piece of information each day and gathered all of them into a now notably large document. I started this venture with a simple desire: the pursuit of knowledge, and this pursuit has become a defining part of myself and my life. My hunger to know, to understand, to comprehend all that is, was, and will be is a core ingredient of my constitution. However, when I reached the number that marked ten years, 3653, I decided to put a halt to this compilation.

While I had amassed a great amount of knowledge, both in my document and in my mind, over the decade, the veracity of every single fact could not be guaranteed. At the onset I was lacklustre with my verification of what I found, but, as time went on, I strove to ensure that the information presented and the sources who presented them were credible. I did not wish to serve false knowledge to those who read my facts nor, of course, to myself. However, I can say with hopeful confidence the majority of what I collected is true.

However, this is a mere guess that I do not desire nor do I want a simple “majority” to be correct. Ideally everything I wrote should be confirmed to be true. I may be limited by the resources at my disposal and how accurately I can express knowledge, but that should be the goal. And thus, we come to this blog's adventure.

I intend to go through every single one of my morsels of information and verify them, as best as possible, and to improve upon them by providing an additional meal of knowledge related to the fact and/or its theme. This will not be done daily like before: I do not wish to accidentally concoct an unpalatable mixture of falsities and deceptions through unnecessary haste. I will aim to produce, for whoever is reading, and for myself, as quickly and accurately as can be achieved. Nonetheless, I am not infallible: if you notice anything amiss, please comment with evidence.

I hope you enjoy the rest of the upcoming dishes.

Recipe:

Ross, Sydney. 1962. “Scientist: The Story of a Word.” Annals of Science 18(2):65–85. Retrieved June 24, 2017.

Warner, Deborah Jean. 1990. “What Is a Scientific Instrument, When Did It Become One, and Why?” The British Journal for the History of Science 23(1):83–93. Retrieved June 20, 2017.

NPR. 2010. “How The Word ‘Scientist’ Came To Be.” NPR. Retrieved June 24, 2017.

Online, OED. 2017. “Scientist, N.” Oxford University Press. Retrieved June 24, 2017.

Online, OED. 2017. “Science, N.” Oxford University Press. Retrieved June 20, 2017.

Harper, Douglas. 2017. “‘Science’ Entry.” etymonline. Retrieved June 18, 2017.