I imagine that there is a lot of truth in the preference of
molecular/cellular biologists to approach things from micro to macro, but
many macrobiologists also seem to ascribe to that format as well. I think
part of the problem lies in the fact that even those of us who learned
biology while the molecular part was in its infancy and who learned
organismal first discovered that things began to make more sense when we
learned the cellular. Since we had not struggled with cellular first, we
had no experience in going that route at the beginning level, and in our
newly acquired wisdom felt that micro to macro was a logical structural
approach to everything. Afterall, we assume evolution worked in that
order. The problem is that our minds do not comprehend in the same order
as evolution occurred. How many text book writers LEARNED biology in a
micro to macro format? And even if they did, they are the elite - the
professors, not the masses who go into biology for other purposes and lack
the enthusiasm or intelligence or perseverance or whatever to ever reach
the Ph. D. level. They are still struggling with which discipline to
choose and thus are not ready to jump right into the "nitty-gritty." Those
students need to see the reason for learning the micro end of things and
will not accept on faith that it is important because we say so. Many of
them will never go as far as the point where they can see why they need
it, and if they do get there, most won't remember it.
Janice
***********************************
Janice M. Glime, Professor
Department of Biological Sciences
Michigan Technological University
Houghton, MI 49931-1295
jmglime at mtu.edu
906-487-2546
FAX 906-487-3167
***********************************
