Editor’s Note: This article was originally published by The Black Liszt on November 6, 2024. With edits to match Minding the Campus’s style guidelines, it is crossposted here with permission.
To call what is taught in the “computer science” departments of universities a “science” is a mind game to get everyone involved to believe that what is taught meets the normal criteria for being a “science.” It doesn’t come close. Well, you might say, some of those departments are more humbly and accurately called “computer engineering.” True. At some point in the distant future, what is taught in computer engineering might rise to the level of what is taught in, say, mechanical or electrical engineering. Until that goal is in sight, it would be more accurate to call the classes something like “Fads, fashions, and sects in computer software practice.”
Physics, Chemistry and Biology
I hope we can all agree that physics, chemistry, and biology are sciences. It wasn’t always that way! They have only gotten to be sciences after long struggles. Physics started emerging about 400 years ago, chemistry a couple hundred years ago, and biology just in the last 150 years or so. In each case, they are studies of reality, with generally accepted statements of how that reality works, as shown by many experiments. In each case, they advance by someone making a hypothesis that can be dis-proven by experiment. If the hypothesis is supported by experiments, more tests are done by many people to refine it, and then it becomes part of the accepted science. Sometimes, a new hypothesis contradicts something that’s accepted but more often refines it—for example, the best way to understand most of Einstein’s work is that it refined Newton’s for special, highly unusual cases. In the vast majority of cases, you can safely use Newton’s laws of motion without being concerned about relativity theory.
[RELATED: Shaky Studies on Women and STEM]
How does Computer Science stand up to these paragons of science?
In physics, you learn the rules of matter, energy, and motion. In chemistry, you learn, first of all, the periodic table of elements, and then all the molecules into which they assemble themselves and how they interact. In biology, you learn about all the living things, from viruses, through plants and animals. What’s the equivalent in computer science? You can say, “oh, it’s the science of computers;” except that physics, chemistry, and biology are things that exist in the world. Humans didn’t create them. Computers are 100 percent human creations, no less than spoons and baseballs. There is no science of spoons—there is a bit of history and a range of modern methods and styles of making them, just like computers. Until we decide that it’s OK to create an academic department of Tablecloth Science, we should be able to agree that there is no such thing as computer “science.”
How did it happen that loads of departments with courses about obviously bogus computer “science” come to be?
The innocent explanation is that, in the early days, computers were closely related to math and were seen basically as giant programmable calculators. In fact, the word “computer” was originally the name of a person, almost always female, who “computed” the answers to math problems. While math isn’t a “science” in the normal sense of the word, it is a kind of pre-existing non-physical reality that, in ways and for reasons that have never been explained, pervades and underlies everything about us and the world we live in. It’s the grounding of all of science. Computers were often studied by the math people in academia, and the precision naturally associated with computers seems to justify the association with science.
But in the end, computers are just fancy machines that people design and build to do stuff. How would you feel about “Refrigerator Science?” Refrigerators are great, and I like what they do. The advances in Refrigerator Science since we used to call them “ice boxes” is amazing. Uhhh, maybe not.
The less innocent explanation is that everyone involved realized that no way is there such a thing as computer science, if we’re at all serious about the term “science.” But there’s no doubt that it makes everyone involved feel better about themselves, so as propaganda, “computer science” gets an A+.
[RELATED: Curricular Visions: Technology as Human Nature]
OK, OK, We’ll call it Computer Engineering
Many places do call it computer engineering. Is that any better? Think about mechanical engineering, for example. Let’s look at my favorite example of building bridges. I’ve gone into huge detail about the differences between bridge-building in peace and war and how it applies to software.
Let’s step back and compare the normal peace-time bridge engineering project with the normal computer software one. At the outset, they seem pretty similar. They start with requirements, then an overall design, then build, testing and inspection and finally production. In fact, many engineering-type methods are used in software, including project management.
For bridges, it works out pretty well. Bridges get built and work, 24 by 7, year after year, with routine maintenance. There are exceptions, but they’re rare. Software? Not so much. Just to hit some highlights, the problems include:
- Bridge-building project management methods are sound and generally produce reasonable results. Software project management methods don’t work.
- Bridges are generally built in-place, so installation is an integral part of the build process. Installing standard software is a nightmare.
- Once built, bridges work. Software QA is broken.
- Bridges just keep working. Software is full of horrible bugs.
- No one stealthily sneaks onto bridges and steals the cars that are on it. Software is full of horrible security holes.
- Bridge-building is driven by solid, proven engineering practice, backed by scientific principles. Software is driven by fashion instead of sound practice.
Given all this, I guess we can still call it computer engineering. But to be fair, we should have it on probation and call it “Computer Sadly-Deficient Engineering” until it rises to the level of mediocrity—which it may, with some luck, someday achieve.
Conclusion
Computer science is not a “science.” Not close. To call it science is propaganda, fraud, ignorance, whatever. Computer engineering is another matter. Computer engineering, both as taught and as practiced, is horrible. The methods, largely lifted from other disciplines, just don’t produce good results most of the time. There isn’t even a movement that recognizes this and agitates to fix it!
Happily, the solutions—good computer engineering practices—exist and have been proven in practice many times over by different groups in different times and places. I have discussed what I know of these methods extensively in this blog and in books. Top programmers discover large parts of them on their own, and use them to achieve stellar results—outside the purview of corporate types, regulators, and bureaucrats. For entrepreneurs versed in these methods, it’s a serious competitive advantage while the crippled, lumbering giants of software shuffle along.
Image by EduLife Photos — Adobe Stock — Asset ID#: 411235827
According to the author’s premise, computer science is not a science probably because it does not involve basic scientific theories. For example in electrical engineering Drude’s model explains at the level of physics, how energy is lost in a resistance when an electron passes through it which it gains when passes through a source. Mesh / loop analysis is based on the same principle, total potential rise equals total potential drop, which can be thought aa an extension of physical theories. In this sense the only natural science is PHYSICS that contains true science theories or principles. All CHEMISTRY and BIOLOGY can be explained using physics ie it’s theories or it’s extensions and in many cases these do not have any relation with theories of physics such as Darwin’s evolutionary principle of survival of the fittest has nothing to do with physical theories.
So “science” does not mean, it must involve theories of physics. It means certain principles which are followed and these can explain observations or its application can make reasonably good predictions or could solve a problem at hand.
Now we come to “computer science”. In computer science, there are large number of basic principles which are used to solve myriad problems in distinct areas of computer science, such as simple algorithm development, solve engineering problems, parallel computing, cybersecurity, computer language development, animations, audio – video editing, Cryptography, Computer forensics, computer graphics, AI and ML. For each of these areas, there are some basic principles (based on Mathematics & Physics) that must be followed to achieve good results.
Perhaps the author has in his mind that computer science is all about making simple algorithm, for example,of maintaining inventory of a store. Even in that case a computer scientist follows certain principles of, how to use a constant, a variable , a pointer, how to define matrix. As a professional and full stack developer one has to know many interfaces and how these can be maintained and synchronised. If the author thinks that there are no theories of physics / science or its extensions involved in cumputer science, then the same is true about biological sciences or even in neuroscience. Perhaps one thing that might be perturbing the mind of the author and ours is, that from time immemorial science has been the study of nature and in that sense computer is not a natural object but soon with robotics and VR, the author might one day will not be able to distinguish between the two and would be more easily convinced to accept computer science as a science.
If I may ask the writer, what is Computer Science? What is science?
“Computer science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes.” Edsger Dijkstra.
If we can define “science” as the way to understand things around us, then computer can be considered a matter of scientific studies even though computers have been created by humans. And the constant study of a computer is what leads to innovation and also taking the example of fridges, I would say that they have benefits a lots from the “science of computer.”
This is the most confused article writer I’ve ever heard of.
Mathematics is the universal language of science because all scientific proofs have mathematical theorems backing them.
The principles of Physics are also grounded in mathematical theorems and formulas. Electronics is a branch of applied Physics so is Computer Engineering which is a branch of Applied Electronics.
Computer Programming & Artificial intelligence themselves rely mainly on proven Mathematical theories and function to carry out functions hence they are largely recognized as fields of Science.
All this article writer just tried to prove is likened to saying that while a man and woman are humans, the child that came forth from them cannot be considered human, but something else.
Arrant Nonsense.
Electrical engineering covers the science for both hardware and software. Molecular, chemical and petroleum engineering inform other elements. The University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign science and engineering centers produce among the most sought-after graduates in the world for this sector and also recently partnered with the University of Chicago in quantum applications. What the author may otherwise be implying is a category that Stanford calls “symbolic systems.”
This article assumes Computer Science means coding on Intel/ARM etc computers. That’s not the case. It’s also about how to make computation possible. How to solve problems under certain time and memory constraints irrespective of the underlying architecture (transistors/cubits). It’s also about how to make machines think, predict, and show intelligence (Machine Learning).
As a Computer Science researcher myself, I can tell you, we form hypothesis, we test hypothesis, and many times our hypothesis is wrong. It’s not all deterministic. We also work on more abstract problems, such as, algorithmic fairness and uncertainty quantification.
On the contrary, most critiques of a Computer Science education stem from the perception that it’s too theoretical and not “practical” enough. This is something that the subject has in common with other scientific disciplines. Computer science is also mainly oriented around algorithms, data structures and finding more efficient ways to implement code, literally just a scientific approach to code. Thus, I would beg to differ.
Your article is full of misinformed and lazy comparisons. First off, claiming that computer science isn’t a science is ridiculous. Computer science is grounded in math, logic, and rigorous theory basic elements of any scientific discipline. If you think it’s just propaganda, maybe take a moment to learn what it actually involves before throwing out ignorant claims.
As for comparing bridge-building to software development that’s like comparing apples to oranges. Sure, bridges are built and maintained in specific ways, but they also need regular upkeep. Bridges don’t magically keep working forever, just like software doesn’t stay bug-free without constant updates and care. Your idea that software is full of bugs while bridges just work shows a complete misunderstanding of how both fields function. Every engineer knows that maintenance is essential in both cases.
Then you bash software QA and security, but fail to recognize the huge strides made in testing and security in software engineering. It’s not broken it’s just complex, evolving, and constantly improving.
Finally, your blanket statement that computer engineering is horrible and software developers achieve success outside the system is a misguided rant. The best programmers often work within structured systems, collaborating, testing, and refining their method something you seem to want to ignore.
Before you bash an entire field, maybe you should actually learn about it. Otherwise, it’s clear you’re just spitting nonsense without understanding the real complexities.
You have no idea what you re talking about, computer science is not studies about human made “computers”, it’s more about finding ideal systems that can get an output from not so ideal input, saying that computer science is the studies of computers is like saying astronomy is the study of telescopes.
A Dullard just dropped an article for content creation…
You don’t even know what computer science is all about talk more of it practices
Okay Sheldon. Go back to your theoretical physics
Hi, Algebra and algorithm/ alkhorism is science. for example: e=mc square is algebraic equation and an algorithm. I hope I will not be moderated based on bias.
Mr. Black… nobody cares about your premise. What something is called in popular culture does not require academic accuracy. Please review the landscape of current American politics… : )
Now, is the term ‘computer science’ intuitively descriptive? No, not by a long shot. So there is a long and interesting discussion to be had (for those with the interest) about the vast and diverse topics covered by those two words… software development, operating systems, databases, graphics, search, security, numerical analysis, human interfaces, cloud, edge, data storage, etc., etc., etc.
Now that would be a worthy article… alas, yours is not.
Mr. Black, I do not know who you are, what you do, or from what vantage point you speak. I, on the other hand, am 60+ years old and in the last few years my career in the high tech industry. From MY vantage point, I would ask you to reflect on the following question:
Do you want to be known as ‘that guy who harped about the accuracy of the term computer science or something else?
Mr. Black, I appeal to you… pick ‘something else’. Be known for building up things that people value… not for things that amount to intellectual vanity. Whatever that is, when YOU turn 60, you will look back and know that you took the more productive road.
It is a wide, wide world. Make the most of it.
This is ridiculous!!!
Very ridiculous!!!
Science simply means’ to know, it just an expression of the search for knowledge and that’s the underlying and common factor between physic, chemistry and biology and every other science you can think of. Well if you say maths is not science that’s your headache but surely maths is the fundamental tool every scientist uses, you may use it in logic, algebra or in so what may.
There’s no search for knowledge in refrigerator nor in a table cloth nor spoon, all these have linear progression and cannot be compares to something as complex as computers. I guess you lack the proper understanding of what computer really is, computer is the structure, its simply the movement and controlling of electrons using binary logic, and trust me this is no joke. You can say computer science is not a science if you fully understand the behaviors of electrons and have discovered every single thing about them
I tend to think we only have two braider fields: Science and Art. Computer science can’t be an art. Computer science is a science.
The basic definition of science could help us understand. Science can be classified into: Natural, social and Logical/ applied.
I believe computer science is a science under Applied science.
You could have stated your stance without insulting/generalizing Nigerian authors lumping all of them together as if it wasn’t a Nigerian that won Africa’s first Nobel prize in literature, the Booker prize, Pulitzer prize,etc.
There are always bad eggs in every group.
Moreover,you don’t agree with a person’s write-up doesn’t make it “bad”
This is a very disturbing article. While the writers proposition do have some historical merit, it does not show the full spectrum of computer world.
Had you finished Phd in computer science, then you may give this propaganda.
While it is true that majority of the application side is computer engineering. But the core in mathematics, the way to formulate hypothesis , fact checks, and continual evolution is in a same league of ‘normal science’.
I respect the oppinion of the writer.
The writers is entitled to his/her oppinion, as do the experts in the field.
The author is right about many things but got it wrong about computer science. Computer science is not the study of the physical computer e.g. Mac or windows. It is the study of computation on general based on scientific study on computation, algorithms, math, proof etc. Computers are just an application that result from the study computation.
Yes, despite what the author said, yes bridges do have bugs, they collapse sometimes, sometimes they badly designed. Yes, they do have security holes, some terrorists may plan to attack a bridge or some states may send a bomb. Is that a proof that civil engineering is not an engineering field?
You are just pained & struggling to make sense…
But guess what!! Your opinion is so irrelevant.
As a mathematician I take issue with this article. It dismisses both mathematics and computer science as real sciences.
I am 64 years old and started studying mathematics in a time when the personal computer did not exist. With the advent of the IBM XT computer programming really took off.
Computing has at its core a slew of mathematical subjects ranging from computability, numerical analysis, logic and probability theory to artificial intelligence, knowledge and data representation and analytics.
The term computer science is a misnomer. Yet the discipline it represents is a real science.
I guess the author of this misleading and disturbing article has no clue what science is all about.
Computer science is both mathematics and engineering and can be described as the application of mathematics to analyze, generate and manipulate data and information using programmable machines to solve problems, generate models or automate real life processes.
And while we are at it, computer science now also is incorporating philosophy, which by many is also not considered a science.
Computational linguistics, computational biology, bio informatics, FinTech (an amalgam of economics econometrics and computer science) are just a few examples of the application of computer science.
The rapid development, evolution and progress in natural, earth, bio and life sciences over the last 50 years would have been impossible without computer science.
Was that article a result of extensive academic research or simply using the opportunity and privilege to put pen to paper, as it were. And, by the way, who decides what is science and what is not? Besides, what qualifies you to decide this matter as you just did probably based on your hypothesis.
Now you have poked the bear, as they say, you may as well prepare your empirical facts to defend your assertion. Good luck.
Well, I think you forget to mention automata theory. In other words, computer science is branch of applied mathematics.
For a world in which the science of Physics didn’t exist, someone did an amazing job of building the Parthenon (which we still don’t know how to replicate), Stonehenge (the transport of whose enormous stones we still can’t explain, let alone how the lintels got on t0op of them), and the Sphinx (the sheer scale of which is breathtaking).
Curiously, the manufacture of tools using various alloys known for their properties, and a long catalog of substances solid, liquid and gaseous, which people created using reliable and repeatable processes, such as soap, which existed in 2800 BC, or glass 3,600 years ago, all preceded the science of Chemistry.
The study of biology, as historical records have it, actually predates recorded history.
Given the author’s abysmal ignorance of the very subjects he opens this magnum opus, what follows should come as no surprise.
It might be worthwhile for the author to note that the correct word in the heading of the third paragraph is paradigm, not p aragon. Perhaps the author couldn’t spell it.
It’s better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a cretin, than to open it and prove the matter.
If in fact this is AI generated, we have nothing to fear from that technology for a long, long time.
This article does little except reveal the profound ignorance of the person who wrote it. I say this as a working scientist, not in computer science, but in physiology and neuroscience.
what a terrible article, did not think I’d have the displeasure of reading such a thing today. please write better articles and not nonsense. you should delete it
I once made an analogous statement to a band director/music instructor, that “music theory is not theory,” (being more akin to descriptive linguistics.) Man, did he ever have a cow! lol
I have seen video of Richard Feynman explaining, computer science is NOT science. It’s engineering. Science is the study of nature.
Ok thank you, for wasting my time. As you said as a computer “studiest”, sorry where did you classify it?
Shows how little the author knows about computer science!
Computer science studies, amongst other things, the foundations of what is fundamentally computable in the world we live in. Turing machines establish what is computable. What is efficiently computable, say in polynomial time, is established using Turing machines for classical physics, but is challenged with quantum physics as quantum computing can potentially be more efficient.
Computer science (or computing science) hence covers what is computable in the physical world we live in. It’s a mixture of mathematics and living with the physical limits imposed by physical sciences. The author doesn’t seem to even know this. Whether it’s a science or not is debatable, but not by someone who doesn’t even understand what foundations of computing science is.
‘Science’ is the pursuit of knowledge. ‘Applied science’ (also called ‘engineering’) is the pursuit of useful knowledge. ‘Technology’ is the application of knowledge for the benefit of mankind.
Algebra and algorithm (alkhorism) come from the inventor , who happened to be champion of scientific method himself. Any algorithm/recipe to make anything (airplane, bridge, burger, chair etc) is pure scientific method. Whoever follows it, gets results. E=mc sqr is algebraic equation and an algo. I hope it makes sense now.
I didn’t finish the first paragraph before I realised that the author is neither qualified nor knowledgeable about what Computer Science is nor the meaning of sciences themselves. If the author was well versed with the current advances of AI and the benchmarks it is accomplishing, that alone could dispel this nonsense notion. In fact, it sounds although the sentiment about CS is coming from a bitter place and bad experiences.
Clearly he doesn’t comprehend that the world today is governed by computer sciences, from the website he is posting this desperate article on to the payroll he anticipates his next cheque on. This is the computer age, yet he is delusional enough to say that compting has not yet reached mechanical engineering status. What a joke. Modern journalism is in a desperate state if someone thinks doing a good job is triggering a reaction from readers by posting sensational opinions that lack basis in reality
To the many commenters who are convinced that CS is indeed a Science, here is some nuance that may help put things in context. I greatly respect Donald Knuth and the study of algorithms, for example. The trouble is, this kind of thing is a tiny part of what software developers do when building code.
https://www.blackliszt.com/2015/05/math-and-computer-science-vs-software-development.html
Computer Scientists have sometimes acknowledged there are serious problems. For example, there was a big conference to address the “crisis in software” … in 1968!
https://www.blackliszt.com/2021/08/the-crisis-in-software-is-over-50-years-old.html
What did they do? They promoted “structured programming” and decided that the essential “go to” statement was evil.
https://www.blackliszt.com/2021/09/software-programming-language-evolution-the-structured-programming-goto-witch-hunt.html
In the end, the value of much of Computer Science, apart from things like studying algorithms, is forming the basis of producing good software that works. Here is material on that:
https://www.blackliszt.com/2024/08/what-is-your-software-project-managers-batting-average.html
Much more on the blog.
You are anthropomorphizing sciences in an inappropriate way, they are regions of intellectual interest and academic study thus are not able to “struggle” towards some intended goal to be a “science”. Since it is if computer science is a science, a term you didn’t bother to accurately define, treating it as some pedestal in your mind for the most esteemed field of study which reflects your bias and is idiosyncratic in the extreme, let’s start there. What is meant by a science is a field employing a specific investigation methodology to achieve reproducible knowledge from a collective set of observations, the scientific method. It is in essence merely a way to achieve meaningful knowledge meant to probe at things that a full study of requires a large group of investigators over spans exceeding a sole human life time. It is not what enlightenment is in South Asian religions nor is it the pinnacle of human thinking, serious scholars don’t think in such juvenile terms as to ordinally rank the life’s work of their colleagues in such dismissive and ignorant ways.
I could go into specific applications of critical theory of each field you hold in esteem, they are as deeply flawed as you believe computer science to be because of its traditional name due to historical circumstances you are clearly wildly ignorant of, but I will let you discover these things for yourself in researching scientific criticism, itself a field of academic inquiry which is an excellent expression of the human nature of such lines of reasoning as well as a reminder that science like mathematics, social sciences and all of the varied fields in Western and Western-looking universities owes its origins and ability to use reason in a systematic way to Greek logic primarily derived from rhetorical argumentation tactics and clever “us vs. them” labeling by Socrates of philosophers contending with sophists in pursuing truth. That is if you actually care whatsoever about advancing human knowledge, but likely at best you like many people in those fields especially, are more concerned with pretending you are the smartest human to ever live for absorbing and parroting the ideas you picked up from others while being too afraid to question these ideas too much, at least publicly, because that’s all rooted ultimately in your nature as a society ape that just so happens to understand abstract meanings enough to lord your higher position on the branch of the acacia you live in over those below you and thinking like this article isn’t helping you evolve any further than that. Thus a more detailed and comprehensive analysis and discussion about the philosophical underpinnings of these fields, their historical context which they emerge from and the academic virtue of only becoming ever more aware of your profound ignorance would be a waste of precious life.
Though sure, it’s not a science (as it is undertaken as a pursuit at present), it’s the application of advanced calculus and advancements in miniaturized electronic engineering that is actually a form of engineering in that it is the use of human abstractions to create highly intricate means by which computations can be automated by mechanical units to ease the burden on humans, a need your writing made me realize was more pressing than I had earlier suspected. It’s no more a dad than physics was after the bomb worked and turned two Japanese cities into ash and shadows burned onto concrete though. It’s also no less a worthy endeavor, even without the massive economic implications it continues to yield as it advanced into ever more esoteric and exponential levels of abstraction, evidenced not only by large public investment in funding departments of universities that pay people to study it as their principle employment but by the fact that you’re existence is as dependent on it’s advancements at this point as it is upon any of the trinity of over hyped fields you evidently feel worthy of science-as-a-badge-of-merit that it isn’t as it’s merely a flawed means of deriving knowledge easily communicated between individuals, which even that assertion stands upon the shaky grounds of the Mind-Body dualism issue and the hard problem of consciousness.
PS Newton was much more an alchemist by modern standards than a physicist and the Catholic Church historically, and presently, has been a principle contributor and benefactor to the advancement of numerous fields especially physics, Einstein’s generation owed much to several Catholic cardinals from the generation prior whose ideas provided the inspiration and contextual backdrop we have to thank for relativity. Your oversimplified understanding is merely the parrot squawking a phrase it cannot comprehend and stripping the complexities of nuance out of it in so doing.
Academics tend to that they only become more aware of how little they know for good reason, maybe try that next time if you want to be taken seriously as a scholar, saying it might even make you aware of the inherent wisdom there.
Go and drink water
Computer science is undeniably a science, as evidenced by the sheer volume of research and advancements in the field. For instance, the number of research papers published on artificial intelligence (AI) alone in recent years far surpasses the publication frequency in traditional sciences like physics, chemistry, and biology. This demonstrates the dynamic and rapidly evolving nature of computer science as a rigorous discipline.
Moreover, computer science adheres to the scientific method, involving hypothesis formulation, experimentation, and peer-reviewed dissemination of findings. Fields like AI, quantum computing, and computational biology not only generate new knowledge but also drive innovation across disciplines. These contributions underline the scientific essence of computer science and its critical role in advancing both theoretical understanding and practical applications.
In summary, computer science is not only a science but a cornerstone of modern scientific inquiry, shaping the future across countless domains.
Computer Science is 100% Science! So I don’t know what you are talking about… It seems you are drunk to have posted such a weak content.
I was typing my comment when you called.
Everything in existence, whether or not it is in the universe, spans between what is natural and what is nonnatural. Within this spectrum is life and its constructs. For humans our constructs include the definition of phenomena, their natural and artificial applications. One such application is to assemble the methods that allows us to migrate our knowledge into one or more subjects of linked observable experiences, which can be verified by all who participate, even if it in an esoteric and recondite cult. When that happens we have a science, so yes there is computer science. Within Computer Science, there can be Algorithm Science, etc.
Everything in existence, whether or not it is in the universe, spans between what is natural and what is nonnatural. Within this spectrum is life and its constructs. For humans our constructs include the definition of phenomena, their natural and artificial applications. One such application is to assemble the methods that allows us to migrate our knowledge into one or more subjects of linked observable experiences, which can be verified by all who participate, even if it in an esoteric and recondite cult. When that happens we have a science, so yes there is computer science.
“Computer Studies” is more appropriate
Obviously, this writer does not know anything about computer science, then I’m not so surprised seeing this.
How could You relate Computer Science and Computer Engineering?
Computer Engineering is basically the architectural designs of Computer hardwares and and installation of robust softwares, while Computer Science is basically a very wide and probably an ever growing field of how softwares operate, and how they can be continuously manipulated to yield better results for mankind.
You also said that Math is not Science, I’m sorry to say “THAT’S THE DUMBEST THING I’VE HEARD SO FAR IN 2024”
Please always learn to seek counsels and review Your blogs before making them Public.
(…Love from Nigeria)
Smiles…
This article has no point.
This years Nobel prize in physics and chemistry were won by computer scientists.
Congratulations to the author for rehashing an argument straight out of the pages of Communications of the ACM from a dozen years ago.
From microprocessors to IoT devices, computer engineers create technologies that power modern life, aligning with the engineering goal of improving human existence.
See how bad your comparison, you compare computer with refrigerator but you have forgotten that nowadays everything is computer. Even the physics, chemistry and and biology are aided with computer now. In the near future you will know which one is the real science
You should be ashamed of yourself for posting such a horribly ignorant opinion.
Just to summarize everything you’re wrong about. Math and computer science fall under what we call “formal science”. Formal sciences are the foundation of natural experimental sciences. All the hypothesis testing is validated by the formality of math, and believe it or not, in the modern day, computer science as well. After all, probability theory is a formal math, and a foundational part of statistics and machine learning. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_science
The next thing. Computer science is NOT about the computer machine particularly. The computer is to the computer scientist what the telescope is to the astronomer. It is an instrument. The theory of computing, languages, and algorithms are completely independent of the machine. Even if we never invented the silicon chip or any other kind of computing device, we would still have a science of computing. In fact, we had algorithms as far back as ancient Greece. When you take algorithms theories, Euclid algorithms is one of the first you learn and that was performed by writing thousands of years before the computer machine.
Lastly, computer engineering… is engineering. It is more engineering than mechanical. With computer engineering, you are both a programmer and an electrical engineer. You are just as much concerned with building the machine from an E&M perspective as you are with programming the machine to yield computations to model reality.
The only thing this article did was give mechanical engineers a bad name and shame on you for doing so.
This is such an egregiously bad article that I don’t even know where to start with criticizing it. First, computer engineering is a completely separate discipline from computer science. The first involves designing computers, the second involves designing software algorithms. Second, computer science is a rigorous field. Maybe not a science in the strictest sense, but nothing like how you’ve described it. You also seemed to confuse computer science with software engineering, which is closely related but also a separate thing. Software engineering is also a legitimate field with rigorous processes and standards. The development cycle of major software products is meticulously planned and carefully documented and managed with careful oversight throughout the whole process, especially for security-minded clients like government agencies. Please do a little bit of research on the fields you’re criticizing next time.
I’m afraid Mr. Black is not well-informed. Computer Science is a formal science with major subfields that include Software Engineering, Computer Vision, Artificial Intelligence, and more. The keyword here is formal science. It should not be compared to the physical sciences but rather to other formal sciences, such as Mathematics and Statistics.
However, I do agree with him on one point: software cannot truly be “engineered.” It is far too complex for that. Perhaps small systems can be engineered, but highly concurrent, multi-tenant systems cannot. Bridges in Civil Engineering, for example, are static structures that are never designed to scale dynamically. Therefore, applying methods from such a field to software development simply does not work.
Perhaps the real issue being addressed here is the prevalence of imposters in Computer Science—individuals from other fields delivering poor-quality work, with the blame unfairly falling on Computer Science itself.
The fact that you don’t even know that computer science and computer engineering are completely different fields puts your stark ignorance on full display.
If you’re going to write a ragebait article, at least put in a little effort in research
Computer Skills, Computer Technology or Computer Applications is more appropriate name as a subject name
I read a lot of negative comments and disrespectful comments in the comment section. But I have to say; there is something call the liberty of free speech and although I myself do not fully agree with the author and his mumbling. The author has a point and and I think he did somewhat of a good job trying to express his opinion about computer science not being a real actual convectional science like physics or chemistry at least the way we think of science in linguistics terms. In the sense of how “words” in this case “science” let’s us think about particular domains and fields and disciplines.
One other thing — a century ago, Eugenics was on the cutting edge of American science.
And then a man named Hitler changed all of that.
Just sayin….
First and foremost, I don’t know what fantasy land the author lives in — a review of Boston’s Big Dig. It all had to be temporarily closed after a multi-ton ceiling panel came loose and killed a woman, most of it is below sea level and leaking salt water like a sieve (which isn’t good for concrete & steel) and the Zakim Bridge has to have heaters on all of the cables because they were throwing ice cubes at the motorists below.
American bridges can AND DO collapse. Just from memory — the 35W bridge over the Mississippi in Iowa collapsed because of gusset plates and engineers not anticipating the effects of the unbalanced load of concrete A bridge in Pittsburgh PA collapsed when the footings shifted. A 4-lane wide section of an I-95 bridge in Connecticut collapsed when steel pins failed. The “silver bridge” in West Virginia failed for some reason. And then there is “galloping gurdy” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-zczJXSxnw
It was far worse in the 19th Century when railroad bridges collapsed with routine frequency. Engineering wasn’t what it is now, and their only solution was to massively overbuild them, which is why most of the turn of the century railroad bridges are still here.
In less than a century, milk has evolved from an often-lethal product that took the full force of government to deal with to something that can sit in a cardboard box for months and then be used on snowy days when I don’t want to go out to the store. Advances in both food technology and food safety have been truly amazing, so much that we don’t even think about it anymore. Microwaved pizza, powdered eggs and everything else — that’s science. As is the building of better and more efficient refrigerators.
As to computers, there is still a lot of math involved — both binary (base 2) and hexadecimal (base 16) and while it is always based on either one or zero — a wire is charged or it isn’t, a CD or DVD has a black spot that absorbs the laser or a silver one that reflects it, the science is figuring out why the computer isn’t doing watt you want it to do.
And as to bridge security, why do you think so many cameras are quietly being installed?
This article is really disturbing cause I am about to venture into the field of computer science and after reading this you are making me have regrets of choosing it in the first place but that aside cause there is nothing I can do about it now. I just want to know will I get a job after studying it??? i mean I already have great skills in full stack development with python I am going to school to sharpen the skill and get a cert cause you need it for a job…please someone should reply me cause I am really frustrated
I will write a detailed reply (below) but for the only field I can think of where knowing the speed of light is important, I’d love to know what computing *is* if not a science, and why all the original Computer Science Professors had Doctorates in Physics.
My suggestion is to learn HOW and not WHAT — learn the underlying theory and mechanics instead of just memorizing how to use a particular application or language because both will change. But the IBM-style PC of today is based on the IBM Mainframe of 1958. It’s a lot faster, Moore’s law is that resources double every 18 months.
Truly what he said is right to an extent! I initially studied Electrical and Electronics Engineering, but now back to school to earn my first degree in Computer Science. What he did not mention however is that new fields are actually emerging from the said field. Every field of Engineering stands on scientific principles, this is where I seem to disagree with him. The examples he gave are actually Natural Sciences, for example, Biological sciences and Chemical Sciences operates differently. Physics, which is a physical science too doesn’t operate like others, principles gathered in these sciences are applied in several engineering fields like Chemical Engineering, Mechanical engineering, Biotechnology, Genetical Engineering etc.
Go on with your program
No matter it’s science, arts or engineering, in reality it’s a tool to solve the society problem effectively and word has been diverted towards it.
CS degrees and coding academy type certifications continue to be used by many firms to select candidates. Once you’re on the job, it’s a whole different matter. If you’re already a skilled full-stack dev, many firms will hire without certification. Good luck!
But they often won’t promote — some of it is a mythical belief that college still is what it was circa 1985 when most of the professors were WWII veterans and not the tenured radicals of today, and students actually learned things.
That said, there is also the benefit of knowing how the machines work and not just that they do, understanding some of the history will give you some perspective as to where you think the field may be going, and provide the gravitas one expects of managers.
The only other thing I would do is take as many writing courses as I could because while there are many who can program, there are damn few of those who can write coherent documentation.
Of course that you will get a job in that field. The sector is really competitive. I hold a BSc on computer science and I see a lot of job description requiring degrees in computer science.
In fact I admit that I totally agree with the article.
I was also seeing it in the same mindset. Although I hold a BSc Computer Science, I never considered myself as a scientist but rather an engineer. Computer or hardware and Software engineering.
Coincidentally, the Master in IT also study the same programs as for BSc Computer Science.
This article has come to raise an awareness about a misappropriation of the word science.
Don’t let this click-bait article frustrate you. I agree that Computer “Science” is not a science, but then neither is Mathematics. And guess what? Without Mathematics (and more recently Computer “Science” itself), no other science would exist. From this point of view, Math and CS are “meta-sciences”.
Don’t worry, regardless of the article here, computing is infact a modern form of science. Let’s take an example of Mathematics which the author hasn’t counted for but it’s the basis of each and every science and without which no science can exist.
Full stack development with python?? I suggest before you base your decision on this article which seems rather close minded to me, being a student of Computer Science, that you do your own research. And if you want to give up after that, do so. But don’t base your decision on this article.
Don’t worry. This article is a fun read, but objectively, it doesn’t make much sense. I’m a mathematician btw.
You will get a job. There are a lot of good jobs in computing and the definition of “science” is way fuzzier than most people realize. This article is all confident opinion with very little factual basis. Don’t change your major or career path based on a know-it-all’s dumb blog piece.
Honestly, it’s really tough out there right now, even for people with good skills. I’m a recent CS grad, and I’ve been applying to hundreds of jobs over the past six months with barely any responses. Employers aren’t just looking for someone with skills—they want years of experience, an insane portfolio, and, sometimes, even a referral just to glance at your resume. A lot of my classmates are stuck in the same spot—working part-time retail jobs while desperately trying to break into the industry.
Certifications are helpful, but they’re not the golden ticket a lot of people think they are. At the end of the day, the market is oversaturated, and full-stack dev is one of the most crowded fields right now. If I could go back in time, I might’ve chosen something else—or at least doubled down on something niche like AI or cybersecurity. Just be prepared for a lot of frustration and uncertainty.
Look, if you read the below comments, specifically the one by Edwin Nascimento, it pretty clearly shows that this article is honestly just utter crap like most tech articles seem to be.
And to address your job concerns, jobs in computer science are opening up all the time. It’s obviously not going to be a walk out of school and get a 300,000 dollar salary, but you can get a really decent starter job if you’ve got good computer science skills, with massive room for growth. I am not great at wording stuff, but I hope this helps
In essence, don’t worry about getting a job, if you like the field, and you’re interested, then definitely go ahead and pursue an education and good luck.
This author of this article is so hilariously misimformes. Computer science isn’t the science of computers, it’s the science of computation. A computer science degree should be teaching students how to formally compute things, whether that’s though math, or a programming language. Computer engineering is about engineering analog or digital devices that can run computations. Software engineering shouldn’t be called engineering, imo, because that is indeed a craft.
Ignore this article, it reeks of opinionated rubbish
I wouldn’t worry too much about titles. Call it whatever you want, but I do agree with the author that calling it science or engineering doesn’t seem appropriate. Personally, I prefer to call myself a computer programmer. I wouldn’t ever want to be called a computer scientist, lol! I guess some people might perceive this title to be less prestigious. I don’t care what people think of my title. What I care about is that I have a decent paying job and I enjoy what I do. Are you pursuing computer “science” for these reasons? Then who cares what it’s called.
You don’t need the word Science attached to your profession. We can be the people heavily associated with data… I think I like the word Bachelor of Computing (BCo).
As for question of prestige associated with the name science; what science really can do is awesome, but what the world without computer would be is simply unthinkable. So think of this, the word computer already carries with it a plethora of prestige.
Who needs the word Science to be prestigious about his profession? Or Engineering attached? Pure science has taken about 20% of the learning curve, art about 5%, Commerce about 12% Computer alone takes about 35%, leaving the rest to those learning space I don’t know how to name. We can create a space for us and walk like wizards among scholars.
Don’t worry about this article buddy. It’s written by someone who either never studied computer science and only read about it in brochures, or who went into it not truly understanding what it is and either flunked out or barely made it through.
He’s wrong on so many aspects of his article, that I can only presume this article was posted for click / rage bait.
I recommend you read most of the other comments to understand why he’s wrong. Computer science is very much a science.
Yes you will get a job. Whether something is a science or not has nothing to do with whether it will be employable. If employability is your main concern then this article doesn’t actually say anything relevant for you.
Dear Mr. Mario, I am really disturbed by the fact that this highly no sensical blog about Computer Science was posted. And I am also disturbed by the fact that some readers including you are taking it seriously.
Computer Science is a complete science in itself. Remember, “computer science” is just a name of the discipline. It has nothing to do with “Computers”, i.e the physical manifestations of a computing machine. Computer science is about counting, computing, estimating, algorithms, optimising, and finding numerical solutions to otherwise insurmountable problems.
In the words of Dutch computer Scientist, Edsger Dijkstra, “Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes”.
I wish you the best with your career endeavours.
Therefore, do not take this childish blog regarding computer science, and continue pursuing your goals.
Whatever is discussed here shouldn’t dictate what you have learnt and had experience in and passion of. Go on and you will succeed
Ignore him he is using a platform and earning money with it, which was made by computer scientist and yes, computer scientists who study computer science.
And my boy you’re heading in the right direction just focus on learning more about AI, and that’s all you need to do.
Relax dude. It’s all word games for clicks and attention. Of course it’s not science. It doesn’t have to be. It’s not Computer Engineering either, unless you’re really building computers (not like putting RAM sticks on a motherboard, but really building new types of computers that nobody heard of, which is very rare).
The correct name is Software Engineer. Just like engineering a building or a bridge. You will be engineering products that’ll help people’s lives easier without it breaking down because of a HEAVY WIND or whatnot.
Future’s bright, just keep learning!
Computer Science is the science of computing. You seem to only have knowledge of the introductory courses, which focus on programming and are indeed like engineering. But later courses on algorithms and the theory of computing are nothing like engineering. Overall, this is an embarrassingly poor article, written by someone who knows almost nothing about the area that they are writing about.
this author knows nothing about computing. If you say computing is not a science, then you are saying mathematics is not a science either because the word computer comes from compute or computing.
Go read the history of computing and see how it developed.
The order in the universe today is sure to accurate measurements computed by nature.
Don’t worry, this guy’s an idiot. Computer Science is somewhere between math and engineering.
Yeah you’ll get a job dude, trust me. This article is BS.
This is the dumbest article I ever read. In Computer Science one must learn Digital circuits, Algorithms, Data Structures, Calculus, Differential Equations, Compiler Theory, Operating Systems Theory, Statistics, Numerical Analysis and a host of other Mathematical Science. The writer of this article is clearly uninformed!
Well the article was right though, but to me that shouldn’t be confusing, because I guess the writer here just feel and need to let the general public realize his thoughts in which was right, but nobody can correct that anywhere except the government….. I even saw an information here online sometime ago that nothing like computer science anymore in Nigeria but was split into maybe 3 or something, but I which included websites designing, programming and other…… So just carry on with your education you don’t need to be confused….
I am a computer scientist.
If no computer science,
I am no one.
I won’t agree with this article of yours, because the inventors were able to invent computer through scientific knowledge (Technology),and I can confidently say that computer science is the gateway for Artificial Intelligence that is now taking over the world and computer has really contributed a lot of development not only in the field of technology, but also health science,art,management and social sciences.
You’re actually, a Computer No-Scientist !..
This article is nothing but a flapdoodle.
You really got some negativity you need to work on first. Maybe you didn’t get so well with codes they bugged you up bad time
Well a total crap article. U know nothing about Computer Science. Yeah you heard, Computer Science.
Exactly, I was hoping to read some sensible criticism at least but the article author doesn’t grasp even basis principles what makes science or engineering, let alone that the sensationalistic title was dealt in text other than ‘journalist’s’ opinion.
Such a waste of time to read this.
CS exits and it is a science, thankfully regardless of what some kid thinks science is 🙂
I feel I just read some hate article from some unbalanced high school kid who got envious of some other smarter kid that got admitted to CS uni and he has to stay and write BS articles for pocket money.
The article reduces science to the scientific method.
It is true that “computer science” is a misnomer; it should be called *Computing* Science.
The statements about physics are incorrect. Einstein’s insights about the nature of reality were the result of thought experiments, and they were confirmed by observation, not experimentation. Another example of of physics discovery not based on observable reality is quantum mechanics; the math works but no one really knows why.
Computer Science lives at the intersection of math, engineering and science. As a result, it uses analytical, deductive, and inferential methods; measuring-test-iteration engineering principles; and simulation and hypothesis testing when everything else fails.
I agree with you Mahmed. The author of the article is an empty vessel 😅, he knows nothing at all.
Probably just seeking attention, dosent have anything valuable worth sharing
True, this guy doesn’t even know what science is.
As a CS PhD, I think that this article tries to make a good point, but it ends being just inflammatory for no reason. The contradiction it falls into is clear when giving a pass to mathematics as the grounding of all sciences while completely dismissing computer science.
Fundamentally, the author’s argument is tied to the idea that computer science is all about how to write software and build computers. And that even these topics do not meet the level of rigor required to belong to the rank of engineering. Let me point out the various key flaws with these arguments.
1. Computer Science is the science concerned with what problems can be computed and how. In other words, computer science is the science of how to acquire and process information to solve a problem. Much like mathematics, computer science provides much needed grounding for humanity to understand and push the boundaries of what class of computing problems can be solved in general, which ones with current technology, for which ones we should only expect approximate answers, etc. If biology explores how life emerged and thrives, computer science explores how thinking works.
2. Computer science is not the study of something humans invented. Indeed, we did not invent “thinking” and “problem solving.” We are just exploring the depths of a fundamental nature that determines what’s computable and what’s not. It is very reductive to think about computer science as the science that studies computers as the physical machines where computation happens. Even if we restrict our discussion to the theory of computer design (the subfield called computer architectures), the physical machines we can put our hands on today lag about 10 years behind the theoretical advancements in computer architectures.
3. Computer science is very multifaceted because the fundamental problem of exploring the boundaries of computation involves many aspects. Making a comparison with bridge construction and using the very vague “software building” for the comparison is very misleading. The bit about installing software is pure nonsense and it leads me to think that the authors simply do not have a good understanding of their machines. You see, software is an all-encompassing term for an incredible complex ecosystem of components. Building a bridge is complex and expensive, but even the most complex bridge is just not comparable to the level of complexity of a modern computing machine. We are talking about hardware manufactured with nanoscale precision, operating at timescales of trillion of operations per second. Hardware that is made to be generic so that fellow humans on the other side of the planet can make it run the computation they need by following a programming interface (the hardware/software boundary). Then other fellow humans write low-level software (firmware) to setup basic functions, which are then lifted further by someone else writing an operating system (OS), so that other people entirely can write applications. And some of these applications can be compilers, thus applications to write other applications. But of course, some may want multiple OS’s on the same platforms. This some other people will write a hypervisor to run multiple OS’s on the same platform without the need to modify any of the OS or applications. The sheer complexity of a modern computing system is astounding. And the fact that for every bridge that stands, you have millions of devices capable of taking pictures of that bridge and send them across the world at light speed is a testimony of the legacy of how transformative computer science has been and continue to be.
4. There are so many disciplines within computer science that are incredibly fascinating and rigorous. From cryptography to real-time, from complexity theory to scheduling, from networking to architectures, from computational fabrication to machine learning, from database systems to robotics. And the list goes on and on. Dismissing all of these as non-science is dangerous and disingenuous given that the current era we live in is *defined* (for better or worse) by computing and computer systems.
In Reality:Computer science is a Physical Science_Artificially man made science like Artificial Intelligence (AI) as Application of Scientific algorithms&mechanisms in solving problems but not a Natural Science_God man like Biology,Chemistry,Physics,Astronomy,Geology,Agriculture….Computer Science is also an Engineering Science…
So you’ve never heard of a nuclear scientist then?
physics is a science
Just as there is a difference between theoretical and experimental science, I believe there is a difference between:
computer science (that makes new languages and OSs),
software engineering (makes new programs from existing tools, backend coding),
software science (UX, QA, front end design),
computer engineering (making new computer parts),
computer technology (working with current computer parts and networks, currently a few facets of IT), and
computer management (security and disaster planning).
Computer science is the study of computer architecture and how a bunch of electrical switches and gates turn voltage into interactive images and sound we manipulate with mouse and keyboard and touch panels.
Hi Lawrence,
You are nuclear scientist I have one question when nuclear fission reaction time there is release alpha beta and gamma rays can be destroyed rays with help of lesser light.
This is by far the stupidest thing I read this week (probably even this month) and that is saying something.
The author (if I can actually call him that) clearly doesn’t know what science (or the scientific method) is.
Computer science is a sub-domain of mathematics you absolute goon. If “math” is a science, so too is computer science. This is perhaps the most ignorant, uneducated article I’ve seen on the internet, which is saying quite a lot.
I do agree with the author in that there’s no science in “COMPUTER”. I do not agree with author in that mathematics is not a science –it doesn’t need to be observational to be a science– it is. Thus, there is science in COMPUTING. In fact that is reflect in the name of a few academic departments in Universities in Canada and the UK, e.g., “Department of Computing Science.”
You mentioned physics, chemistry, and biology as different branches of science but failed to define the word science which when you are to dig dipper its contemporary definition would sound something like the pursuit of truth about something which can as well be proven by others in self similar way which the white man did to promote computation through out the whole world, and without computer science; the truth about computers how would you have posted this good thought online for us to discuss.
Because computer science is indeed a science, from it I have developed a Quantum Computer science and used it to develop my Field Marshall first generation full stack alternating 6l6ctron spin quantum computer which works on the principle of alternating current electricity as a quantum wave, using artificial semiconductor called Astronite and Kinetium of both alpha and Omega types to describe its pure form or mixed form.
Astronite and Kinetium are room temperature superconductors, producing super position and entertainment at universal temperature range without decoherence and providing decades of coherent time provided electricity flow is under interrupted.
Once you missed computer science in this vanishing classical era how far will you miss the quantum era? Please paraphrase the word science.
Isn’t it a branch of electronic engineering?
This is quite possibly the most mind-numbingly bad article I’ve ever had the pleasure of reading in my entire life.
You clearly have no concept of what Computer Science is, let alone the fact that Computer Engineering is another separate discipline. Computer Science is a legitimate scientific field which studies algorithms, computational complexity as well as digital systems and far beyond. Theory of computation, computability, formal languages and automata as well as all theoretical computer science fields might not be physical, but their applications and methodology perfectly fall within the category of ‘science’. Using discrete structures to model problems qualifies computing as science. Investigating time-space complexity is science.
The fact that you even have the audacity to write ‘OK, OK, We’ll call it Computer Engineering’ is frankly insulting. You neither know Computer Science, nor Computer Engineering, which is another separate discipline: Computer Engineering, which bridges Computer Science with Electrical Engineering, is often grouped with EE all together. There are similarities in CS and CE and there can be even more if you decide to explore the areas which overlap, such as embedded systems, computer architecture and anything involving digital systems or low-level applications.
I would love to continue shitting on your rage-bait post, but I think we have better things to do, than to listen to the opinion of someone who neither comprehends CS, nor respects the field and its derivatives.
You nailed it,
He should have starts with course like political science, even in definition they called economic a science, …
I was thinking the same. I’m studying computer engineering, and I knew the whole article was shit when I heard him say CS should be called CE
For the gurus in the field of Computer sciences; thank you for correcting an eroding impression that could discourage academic advancement into the world of modern science.
Love this comment 🙏🏾
Computer science is an applied science rooted in rigorous methodologies, bridging theoretical models with real-world applications. It employs scientific principles to analyze, design, and optimize computational systems, driving innovation across industries. Dismissing it as ‘not a science’ reflects a narrow view of science itself and overlooks its transformative impact on modern society.
Computer Science is similar to Computational Mathematics. Computer Science just has less math and more computer and science classes and Computational Mathematics has more math. I am majoring in Computational Mathematics.
This made my day. Next we’ll have to read from some pretentious blogger how it’s not engineering either.
Computer science, from a philosophical perspective, is about understanding how computers work and how we can use them to solve problems. It’s not just about building computers but also about thinking logically, creating instructions (called programs), and making machines “think” or do tasks for us. Philosophically, it’s about exploring ideas like how we process information, how technology affects our lives, and what it means for computers to “know” or “learn.”
how about social science, behavioral science?
“Computer Studies”
Shallow post. Study the philosiphy of computer science book.
Yet this computer science has helped in every aspect of human lives. Yes, it’s not a real “science”, but it has theoretical aspects and applied spectrum. The study of computers, how they work, how humans interact with it and how useful it is, is what considers it a science. And I bet you that none of the other sciences would have helped you make this webpage, that is if you were the one who actually made it.
Computer Science is the science of computable functions. It is concerned with identifying what can be computed or not within the constraints of TIME and SPACE. Recently bandwidth is also started to be a factor. COMPLEXITY and COMPUTATION .
Computer Science not the study of computing devices because you can study it without ever using any device.
Yet this computer science has helped in every aspect of human lives. Yes, it’s not a real “science”, but it has theoretical aspects and applied spectrum. The study of computers, how they work, how humans interact with it and how useful it is, is what considers it a science. And I bet you that nor of the other sciences would have helped you make this webpage, that is if you were the one who actually made it.
Computer science is a multifaceted field that draws from various scientific disciplines, including:
Mathematics
1. *Algebra*: Group theory, ring theory, and field theory form the basis of computer science concepts like coding theory and cryptography.
2. *Geometry*: Computational geometry, computer-aided design (CAD), and geographic information systems (GIS) rely on geometric principles.
3. *Calculus*: Optimization techniques, machine learning, and scientific computing utilize calculus concepts.
Physics
1. *Electromagnetism*: Understanding electromagnetic principles is crucial for designing and building computer hardware, such as CPUs, memory, and networking devices.
2. *Thermodynamics*: Heat management and energy efficiency are essential considerations in computer architecture and data center design.
Cognitive Science
1. *Psychology*: Human-computer interaction (HCI), user experience (UX) design, and cognitive architectures draw from psychological principles.
2. *Linguistics*: Natural language processing (NLP), computational linguistics, and human language technology rely on linguistic theories.
Information Theory
1. *Shannon’s Information Theory*: This fundamental theory underlies data compression, encryption, and communication protocols.
Statistics and Probability
1. *Statistical Inference*: Machine learning, data mining, and statistical analysis rely on statistical inference techniques.
2. *Probability Theory*: Randomized algorithms, probabilistic modeling, and uncertainty quantification are all based on probability theory.
Philosophy
1. *Logic*: Propositional and predicate logic form the basis of programming languages, formal verification, and artificial intelligence.
2. *Epistemology*: The study of knowledge and knowledge representation is essential in artificial intelligence, knowledge graphs, and expert systems.
Computer science is an interdisciplinary field that draws from these scientific disciplines to create innovative solutions, models, and technologies.
Excellent
This is the best analytical answer for me across all the replies here! Thank you for these strong inputs.
This is absolutely a great response to the challenge, above all, as far as Computer Science draws from different disciplines especially Math, Psychology and Physiology. Computer Science has now became another Science on its own self. But simply can refer it as “Applied Science” as we already have a faculty in our Universities called faculty of “Natural and Applied Sciences”
This is absolutely a great response to the challenge, above all, as far as Computer Science draws from different disciplines especially Math, Psychology and Philosophy. Computer Science has now became another Science on its own self. But simply can refer it as “Applied Science” as we already have a faculty in our Universities called faculty of “Natural and Applied Sciences”
I think before you write u need to understand what they mean by computer science, if you don’t know it referred to the science of computing focusing on the science of computing involving memory, processor and other peripherals, just like biology as a science of life this one is science of computing in computer
Here are a few reasons why computer science is considered a science:
Systematic Study: Like other sciences, computer science involves the systematic study and exploration of computational processes, data, algorithms, and the principles underlying the use and design of computers.
Theoretical Foundations: It delves into theoretical aspects, such as algorithms, computational theory, and artificial intelligence, much like how physics explores theoretical concepts about the natural world.
Experimental Methods: Computer scientists use experimental methods to test hypotheses and validate the performance and efficiency of algorithms and systems, similar to how experiments are conducted in natural sciences.
Mathematics Integration: It heavily relies on mathematics for problem-solving and developing computational models, which is a hallmark of scientific disciplines.
Peer Review and Publication: Like other scientific fields, research in computer science is published in peer-reviewed journals and conferences, ensuring the rigor and validity of its contributions to knowledge.
Type of Science
Computer science can be categorized under formal sciences. Formal sciences include disciplines that study formal systems, such as mathematics and logic. They are concerned with abstract structures and theoretical foundations rather than physical phenomena. In this sense, computer science fits in because it deals with computational theory, algorithms, and data structures, which are abstract concepts that do not directly relate to the physical world.
However, computer science also intersects with applied sciences when it comes to practical applications, such as software engineering, artificial intelligence, and cybersecurity. These areas focus on applying theoretical principles to solve real-world problems.
In essence, computer science is a unique blend of formal and applied sciences, making it a versatile and dynamic field
Isn’t mathematics the science of numbers, quantity, and space?
This is such a highly skewed and misguided writeup by an abysmally and pathetically ignorant author who most likely never studied computer science in a university and never bothered to get his facts right. He doesn’t even know what science means nor why the so called hard core sciences are classified as such.
The controversy he elected to dabble into comes under philosophy of science and epistemology and yet he never bothered to acquaint himself with even the most basic of the facts. Shameful!
You’re right. I think the author has Philosophy background. That’s how they argue
This is a good write up that computer engineering is not science. Your presentation in this article is articulated in a very clear and unambiguous terms. As a student of computer engineering “Not Science again” i concur with you.
Computer did not follow the rudimentary process of science at all. It is a concocted and fabricated invention that does not follow the scientific approach of discovery like mythology, hypothesis, theory, experimentation and testing. Your analogy with Physics, Chemistry and Biology is enough to buttress any argument that computer science is not a science.
The question is why our mighty academic institutions like Universities and their professors were silence and mute about it.
Wow, so is political science a science?
Thank you. The author doesn’t know what science means.
Yes you are the only intellectual and rest of universities in world are dumb and stupid to use phrase computer science.
If David post rubbish here again I won’t read this blog again. What kind of illiterate writers do you have here? Nigerian writers are so backward. How on earth will you say computer science is not science. David you are so backward. Please the chief editor of this blog, please mind who you allow to write for you or who you work with. Said is so backward. Do you know the application of computer science in scientific world today which you are enjoying?
Here’s a point to prove that computer science is, indeed, a science:
The Scientific Method is Applied in Computer Science
Computer science employs the scientific method to develop and test hypotheses, theories, and models. This involves:
1. *Observation*: Computer scientists observe phenomena, such as algorithms’ performance or users’ behavior.
2. *Hypothesis*: They formulate hypotheses to explain these phenomena.
3. *Prediction*: Based on these hypotheses, they make predictions about the outcomes of experiments or simulations.
4. *Experimentation*: Computer scientists design and conduct experiments to test their hypotheses, using methods like prototyping, simulation, or data analysis.
5. *Analysis*: They analyze the results, often using statistical methods, to determine whether the data supports or rejects their hypotheses.
6. *Conclusion*: Based on the results, computer scientists refine their hypotheses, develop new theories, or create innovative solutions.
Examples of scientific inquiry in computer science include:
– Developing and testing algorithms for solving complex problems
– Investigating the performance of different data structures and databases
– Studying human-computer interaction and user experience
– Researching artificial intelligence, machine learning, and natural language processing
By applying the scientific method, computer science advances our understanding of computational systems, algorithms, and their applications, making it a genuine scientific discipline.
I have read the assertion by the author and decided to contribute rather to contest his generic view about computer science and maths not in the domain of science.
Minimization theorem, advanced calculus and concepts of limits in maths are derivatives of human creations as axioms, hypothesis and theorems were postulated and proven before their applications in real times and human-needs creations.
As an engineer who has delved into maths and classical mechanics, one would rather consider the science, the art of establishing creations and creativity with interpretations to abstract bodies ( both rigid and non-rigid using free body concepts and analysis) governing computer in its entirety as a super set instead of the 8088 subset of computer. There is a thin line that separates real from apparent in the governing physics of waves mechanics: a manner with which evolution of computer applications to human thinking (AI, etc) is being considered as an approach to de-risking elements of science for human needs, which are science based. This, and in the limit of needs application, the governing science of this application to human thinking that has applied and enhanced computer knowledge may have a policy thrust that would erode the academia’s believe that computer science is not science after all, and as per the author’s assertion.
I would leave the conglomerate of contributors to the novel discourse to have a scope of elements that would guide the broad statement that computer science is science!
I wish all of us in the forum Merry Christmas and a Good science based New Year.
Author is confusing Software Development, which is highly specific, with the underlying science – Computer Science. Software Development process can vary greatly, but it is just one application of computer science in the physical world. It is akin to complaining about Electrical Engineering when your contractor does a crappy job.
The writer needs to know more about computer as a science.He need to dive deeper and understand the roles of computing in the modern world.I read with curiosity but found our the writer never used any deep computing words like algorithms,deep fakes and even AI,AI Agents which is really coming in 2025 to take over the world I think this article maybe kind of old or the writer is just trying to use the argument to achieve popularity.If that’s what it it,then the writer has succeeded.if not,saying computer science is not a science is just a bunch of craps!
It seems the author confuses tech with science. Writing a (broken) web app or constructing a fridge is not science and no one claims it is. Proving the lower bound of an algorithm is science, just like math is.
A further confusion is calling “fashion” the nonlinear nature of learning.
Big grammar for an empty head