Question

When Computer Science first began as an independent scientific domain, it was argued that its independence was unnecessary, since we already had mathematical logic and electrical engineering, which is "all computers are," and that computers are "just tools" and not a science. In what ways are arguments for and against Data Science similar?

Answer 1

The independence of Data Science as a scientific domain is similar to past arguments about Computer Science in that it blends various disciplines to create a new field, which some may consider just a tool rather than a science. These debates often involve the distinction and value of basic versus applied science, demonstrating that both are essential for progress.

Step-by-step explanation:

Arguments surrounding the independence and scientific domain of Data Science echo earlier debates concerning Computer Science, where some initially contended that it was simply a subset of mathematics and electrical engineering. Like its predecessor, Data Science combines elements from different disciplines, including biology, statistics, and computer algorithms, to analyze vast databases, leading to the discovery of new patterns and insights.

The debate often centers on the distinction between basic and applied science, with divergent views on whether the pursuit of knowledge for its own sake is justified or whether the focus should be on practical applications. However, history shows us that fundamental knowledge frequently leads to beneficial applications, and the continuous interaction between descriptive (inductive) and hypothesis-based (deductive) science is crucial for scientific advancement.