# A question for wildlife biologists

**URL:** <https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/a-question-for-wildlife-biologists/57833>\
**Category:** Nature Talk\
**Created:** [November 1, 2024, 7:10pm UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/a-question-for-wildlife-biologists/57833 "2024-11-01T19:10:08Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 3

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![AdamWargon](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.inaturalist.org/adamwargon/32/44649_2.png) [@AdamWargon](https://forum.inaturalist.org/u/AdamWargon)\
**Post date:** [November 1, 2024, 7:56pm UTC](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/a-question-for-wildlife-biologists/57833/3 "2024-11-01T19:56:15Z")

</div>

On this topic of biological literacy, I think folks like @jnstuart remember “back in the day” when “biologist” was somewhat synonymous with “naturalist”. It meant that you knew about plants, and animals, and stuff like that.

Today, a “biology degree” often refers to MICRO biology, where a person might get an advanced degree (a master’s or a PhD) by staring down a microscope, but they couldn’t pick their study organism out of a lineup.

So today, I talk about “field biology” or “zoology”. I don’t say “biology”, because it conjures up images of pipettes and centrifuges and things.

> [@What does the i in iNaturalist stand for?](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/what-does-the-i-in-inaturalist-stand-for/54083/14):
>
> Related:
> 
> > [@How does iNaturalist define who is a scientist and who is not?](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/how-does-inaturalist-define-who-is-a-scientist-and-who-is-not/14320/6):
> >
> > For what it’s worth, “naturalist” is a complicated word in English.
> > 
> > From the 1600s to the 1800s it would have been considered synonymous with “scientist”, and not had a particularly “professional” connotation.
> > 
> > In the 1900s, much of scientific interest became more specialized and codified into institutions, and the general study of natural phenomena perceivable to anyone came to be viewed by many as irrelevant or old fashioned.
> > 
> > “Scientist” became an identity that suggested advanced levels of formal education and professional achievement marked by degrees, certifications, and other institutional markers, while “naturalist” became more associated with professional and volunteer educators who worked in parks and helped people understand the non-human world.
> > 
> > My use of “naturalist” on iNaturalist intentionally attempts to dissolve those distinctions and assert a more wholistic identity defined as “someone with a conscious interest in non-human life”. It includes:
> > 
> > - University professors studying fly behavior
> > - Nature center employees teaching visitors about sea stars
> > - And anyone who’s ever stopped on the trail to wonder what a flower was
> > 
> > A bit more akin to the 1800s concept, without the implication that the only people with the time and resources to pursue such interests are those unfairly benefitting from entrenched, systemic inequality.
> > 
> > Which is a long way of saying that this one might be tough to translate!

---

_[View the full topic](https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/a-question-for-wildlife-biologists/57833)._