Cited by 641Philosophy and History of ScienceInterdisciplinary Research and CollaborationHistory of Science and Medicine

A new biology for a new century

Open access
Woese, Carl R.·2004·Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews

Abstract

Biology today is at a crossroads. The molecular paradigm, which so successfully guided the discipline throughout most of the 20th century, is no longer a reliable guide. Its vision of biology now realized, the molecular paradigm has run its course. Biology, therefore, has a choice to make, between the comfortable path of continuing to follow molecular biology's lead or the more invigorating one of seeking a new and inspiring vision of the living world, one that addresses the major problems in biology that 20th century biology, molecular biology, could not handle and, so, avoided. The former course, though highly productive, is certain to turn biology into an engineering discipline. The latter holds the promise of making biology an even more fundamental science, one that, along with physics, probes and defines the nature of reality. This is a choice between a biology that solely does society's bidding and a biology that is society's teacher.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1128/mmbr.68.2.173-186.2004

Cites

68 of 68 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Science is driven by both technological advances and a guiding vision.

    “As Woese has argued (Woese, 2004), science is driven by both technological advances and a guiding vision.”

    From Neuroscience Needs Behavior: Correcting a Reductionist Bias (2017) · cites this paper as Woese, 2004

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Woese, C. R.
Affiliations
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
Corresponding author
Woese, Carl R.
Venue
Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
Published
2004-06
Volume
68
Issue
2
Pages
173-186
ISSN
  • 1092-2172 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-5557
OpenAlex
W2122010307
Cited by
641
References
68
Citations by year
2026: 23 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 54 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 46 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 24 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 37 · 2015: 24 · 2014: 37 · 2013: 26 · 2012: 20
FWCI
31.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Energy
  • National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Philosophy and History of Science
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Interdisciplinary Research and Collaboration
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › History of Science and Medicine
Keywords
future of biology, philosophy of biology, nature of reality, scientific paradigm shift
MeSH terms
Biology, Science, History, 21st Century

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review