An example of phrasing likely to encourage misconceptions:
"So if atoms make up molecules, and molecules constitute chemical elements, and elements make up different types of material objects, and material objects are the parts of cells, and cells make up organisms, and organisms make up societies, then if we understand atoms (or quarks or whatever we take as fundamental) and how these combine to form less fundamental objects, that should suffice. Scientific truths of biology then could be restated as truths about chemistry, those in chemistry in terms of physics. So the reasoning goes."
Sandra D. Mitchell (2003) Biological Complexity and Integrative Pluralism, Cambridge University Press
Prof. Mitchell here is presenting (but not supporting) the reductionist position where 'all is (ultimately) physics'. There are two points of interest about this form of words.
The first is the shift from the nano-scale (atoms, molecules) to the macroscopic phenomenological level (of material objects) which is such a key focus of work in chemical education. This particular formulation leads to the problematic notion that 'elements make up different types of material objects' when most everyday objects are not samples of elements. (We can think of reasonable exceptions: a 24 carat gold ring, a stick of sulphur to be powdered and used for its antimicrobial proprieties – but these are exceptions when it comes to 'material objects').
Prof. Mitchell is writing for a scholarly readership who would not be expected to be misled by this phrasing, but a naive reader could arguably easily misconstrue this.
Read about micro-macro confusions
The second point is the suggestion that 'molecules constitute chemical elements'. This is presented as if it is a universal generalisation. Of course, there are many examples where under ranges of conditions elements are molecular (the sulpuhr referred to above, oxygen separated form the air by fractional distillation, etc.), but this is not generally true. Indeed by far most of the known elements are metals, which are not normally molecular. But this is a generalisation that learners may inappropriately make – that all substances are molecular.
Read about the nature of alternative conceptions
Read about some examples of science misconceptions
Read about historical scientific conceptions
